Podcasts about cnd

Cleir Estevam, que reassumiu a direção da Fundação Hospitalar Henrique Lage no dia 21 de março, participou nesta sexta-feira (9), do programa Cruz de Malta Notícias e comentou o cenário encontrado ao retornar ao comando do hospital. Segundo Cleir, o hospital enfrenta pendências relacionadas ao pagamento de encargos trabalhistas, o que impede a emissão da Certidão Negativa de Débitos (CND). “São cerca de R$ 110 mil de FGTS e R$ 32 mil de INSS, valores já com multa e juros”, explicou o diretor. Outro ponto crítico revelado por Cleir é a paralisação da obra de reforma e ampliação do centro cirúrgico, fundamental para a realização de novos procedimentos e a celebração de convênios. De acordo com ele, a obra foi licitada e aprovada pela Vigilância Sanitária, mas não havia recursos em caixa para sua continuidade. “O centro cirúrgico nós tivemos que parar por falta de recursos. A obra está orçada em R$ 2,3 milhões. Já foram pagos R$ 300 mil, mas ainda faltam R$ 2 milhões. Esse valor não estava garantido em caixa. Se hoje fosse feita uma medição de R$ 500 mil, não teríamos como pagar. Por isso, decidimos suspender a obra e buscar recursos para concluir”, afirmou. Ouça a entrevista completa:

Tá nos ares +1 Maconhômetro Debate, um projeto do Cannabis Monitor em parceria com a Plataforma Brasileira de Política de Drogas, com a proposta de contextualizar e aprofundar temas relevantes envolvendo a maconha e a política de drogas no Brasil e no mundo.Nesse episódio, Monique Prado recebe a psicóloga, redutora de danos e coordenadora da REDUC, Maria Angélica Comis, o cientista social e vice-presidente da Abrasme, Leonardo Pinho, e o psicólogo e secretário executivo do programa de drogas da Fiocruz, Francisco Netto, pra trocar uma ideia sobre a histórica 68ª reunião da Comissão de Drogas Narcóticas da Organização da Nações Unidas, CND na sigla em inglês, que foi realizada em março deste ano, em Viena, na Áustria, e promoveu uma verdadeira mudança de paradigma nos debates sobre o enfrentamento do tema a nível global.Este episódio propõe um debate sobre os bastidores, os destaques das participações do governo brasileiro e iniciativas da sociedade civil, os resultados e as reflexões geradas pela 68ª reunião da CND com ativistas do campo antiproibicionista que estiveram presentes e atuantes nos espaços propostos pelo evento.Confira e fique por dentro!Link para o relatório da Abrasme sobre a 68ª reunião da CND/ONU: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PE0rCWyww-vAeilDwVWgu-oqSUBqnU2F/viewApoie o Cannabis Monitor: http://apoia.se/cannabismonitor

Chuck and Adam give their thoughts on what went wrong in game 7 and how the Clippers lost this 1st round series with a live show on CnD. 

Hey everyone, check out this episode that we recorded a while ago and Raul has been to much of a garbage parson to put out. Big thanks to Anthony R for the editing this. On this episode we look into the work of John Carl Buechler and explore Carnosaur, Cellar Dweller and Troll. Raul and Anthony are joined by special guest Jee Wreg! That's right, the other Greg from North Kakilak and things get silly and weird. We really hope you enjoy the episode.TrollRaul - 9.5 out of 10 sexy wood nymphs (buy)Anthony - 9 out of 10 Gawlwin the well endowed (watch on tubi unless you love fantasy horror then buy)Jee-Wreg - 9 out of 10 Rat Burgers (if you have CND) 7 if you don't  stream)Cellar DwellerRaul - 6.5 out of 10 obnoxious artists (stream)Anthony - 7 out of 10 Lisa's gulped eyeballs (watch on youtube)Jee-Wreg - 7.5 out of 10 artists scarves (stream)CarnosaurRaul - 9 out of 10 mutant chicken births (stream)Anthony - seven point ten out of 10 Clint Howards eating chicken in a chicken coop (watch on youtube but buy it if you have a shelf of dinosaur horror in your collection)Jee-Wreg - 7 out of 10 if you drank some strong rum (4.5 otherwise) blueberries covered in goat embryonic fluid (watch on youtube then listen to the podcast then watch it again)Website Links:Website -⁠ https://headlongintomonsters.godaddysites.com⁠Twitter -⁠ https://twitter.com/In2Monsters⁠E-mail - ⁠headlongintomonsters@gmail.com⁠Facebook Group -⁠ https://www.facebook.com/groups/1192679381675030⁠Anthony Links:Instagram - ⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/johnnypaintbox/⁠⁠Johnny Paintbox - ⁠⁠https://www.johnnypaintbox.com/info/artist-statement-⁠⁠MRAC Film Club - ⁠https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mrac-film-club/id1716134038⁠Ashley Links:Twitter -⁠ https://twitter.com/BarelyAshley⁠Letterboxd -⁠ https://letterboxd.com/barelyashley/⁠Monochrome Creeps Hashtag link (watch long party every saturday night at 11 pm EST with Ashley and Tombs on twitter)- ⁠https://twitter.com/hashtag/MonochromeCreeps?src=hashtag_click⁠Raul Links:Twitter -⁠ https://twitter.com/RaulVsMonsters⁠Letterboxd -⁠ https://letterboxd.com/into_monsters/⁠Jee Wreg Links:Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/the_explainers_punks/Listener Feedback, Horror Happenings and Ra-Ghouls Reprehensible reading Room music Created by Mike Miller (Mike twitter): ⁠https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004929583462⁠Opening Music:⁠ https://audiojungle.net/item/80s-horror-retro-background/33176055⁠Closing Music:⁠ https://audiojungle.net/item/hip-hop-horror/25238003⁠

Guest Bio:  Dave Snowden divides his time between two roles: founder & Chief Scientific Officer of Cognitive Edge and the founder and Director of the Centre for Applied Complexity at the University of Wales.  Known for creating the sense-making framework, Cynefin, Dave's work is international in nature and covers government and industry looking at complex issues relating to strategy, organisational decision making and decision making.  He has pioneered a science-based approach to organisations drawing on anthropology, neuroscience and complex adaptive systems theory.  He is a popular and passionate keynote speaker on a range of subjects, and is well known for his pragmatic cynicism and iconoclastic style. He holds positions as extra-ordinary Professor at the Universities of Pretoria and Stellenbosch and visiting Professor at Bangor University in Wales respectively.  He has held similar positions at Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Canberra University, the University of Warwick and The University of Surrey.  He held the position of senior fellow at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies at Nanyang University and the Civil Service College in Singapore during a sabbatical period in Nanyang. His paper with Boone on Leadership was the cover article for the Harvard Business Review in November 2007 and also won the Academy of Management aware for the best practitioner paper in the same year.  He has previously won a special award from the Academy for originality in his work on knowledge management. He is a editorial board member of several academic and practitioner journals in the field of knowledge management and is an Editor in Chief of E:CO.  In 2006 he was Director of the EPSRC (UK) research programme on emergence and in 2007 was appointed to an NSF (US) review panel on complexity science research. He previously worked for IBM where he was a Director of the Institution for Knowledge Management and founded the Cynefin Centre for Organisational Complexity; during that period he was selected by IBM as one of six on-demand thinkers for a world-wide advertising campaign. Prior to that he worked in a range of strategic and management roles in the service sector. His company Cognitive Edge exists to integrate academic thinking with practice in organisations throughout the world and operates on a network model working with Academics, Government, Commercial Organisations, NGOs and Independent Consultants.  He is also the main designer of the SenseMaker® software suite, originally developed in the field of counter terrorism and now being actively deployed in both Government and Industry to handle issues of impact measurement, customer/employee insight, narrative based knowledge management, strategic foresight and risk management. The Centre for Applied Complexity was established to look at whole of citizen engagement in government and is running active programmes in Wales and elsewhere in areas such as social inclusion, self-organising communities and nudge economics together with a broad range of programmes in health.  The Centre will establish Wales as a centre of excellence for the integration of academic and practitioner work in creating a science-based approach to understanding society.   Social Media and Website LinkedIn: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/dave-snowden-2a93b Twitter: @snowded Website: Cognitive Edge https://www.cognitive-edge.com/   Books/ Resources: Book: Cynefin - Weaving Sense-Making into the Fabric of Our World by Dave Snowden and Friends https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cynefin-Weaving-Sense-Making-Fabric-World/dp/1735379905 Book: Hope Without Optimism by Terry Eagleton https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hope-Without-Optimism-Terry-Eagleton/dp/0300248679/ Book: Theology of Hope by Jurgen Moltmann https://www.amazon.co.uk/Theology-Hope-Classics-Jurgen-Moltmann/dp/0334028787 Poem: ‘Mending Wall' by Robert Frost https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44266/mending-wall Video: Dave Snowden on ‘Rewilding Agile' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrgaPDqet4c Article reference to ‘Rewilding Agile' by Dave Snowden https://cynefin.io/index.php/User:Snowded Field Guide to Managing Complexity (and Chaos) In Times of Crisis https://cynefin.io/index.php/Field_guide_to_managing_complexity_(and_chaos)_in_times_of_crisis Field Guide to Managing Complexity (and Chaos) In Times of Crisis (2) https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/managing-complexity-and-chaos-times-crisis-field-guide-decision-makers-inspired-cynefin-framework Cynefin Wiki https://cynefin.io/wiki/Main_Page   Interview Transcript Ula Ojiaku:  Dave, thank you for making the time for this conversation. I read in your, your latest book - the book, Cynefin: Weaving Sense Making into the Fabric of Our World, which was released, I believe, in celebration of the twenty first year of the framework. And you mentioned that in your childhood, you had multidisciplinary upbringing which involved lots of reading. Could you tell us a bit more about that? Dave Snowden:  I think it wasn't uncommon in those days. I mean, if you did… I mean, I did science A levels and mathematical A levels. But the assumption was you would read every novel that the academic English class were reading. In fact, it was just unimaginable (that) you wouldn't know the basics of history. So, if you couldn't survive that in the sixth form common room, and the basics of science were known by most of the arts people as well. So that that was common, right. And we had to debate every week anyway. So, every week, you went up to the front of the class and you were given a card, and you'd have the subject and which side you are on, and you had to speak for seven minutes without preparation. And we did that every week from the age of 11 to 18. And that was a wonderful discipline because it meant you read everything. But also, my mother was… both my parents were the first from working class communities to go to university. And they got there by scholarship or sheer hard work against the opposition of their families. My mother went to university in Germany just after the war, which was extremely brave of her -  you know, as a South Wales working class girl. So, you weren't allowed not to be educated, it was considered the unforgivable sin. Ula Ojiaku:   Wow. Did it mean that she had to learn German, because (she was) studying in Germany…? Dave Snowden:  She well, she got A levels in languages. So, she went to university to study German and she actually ended up as a German teacher, German and French. So, she had that sort of background. Yeah. Ula Ojiaku:  And was that what influenced you? Because you also mentioned in the book that you won a £60 prize? Dave Snowden:  Oh, no, that was just fun. So, my mum was very politically active. We're a South Wales labor. Well, I know if I can read but we were labor. And so, she was a local Councilor. She was always politically active. There's a picture of me on Bertrand Russell's knee and her as a baby on a CND march. So it was that sort of background. And she was campaigning for comprehensive education, and had a ferocious fight with Aiden Williams, I think, who was the Director of Education, it was really nasty. I mean, I got threatened on my 11 Plus, he got really nasty. And then so when (I was) in the sixth form, I won the prize in his memory, which caused endless amusement in the whole county. All right. I think I probably won it for that. But that was for contributions beyond academic. So, I was leading lots of stuff in the community and stuff like that. But I had £60. And the assumption was, you go and buy one massive book. And I didn't, I got Dad to drive me to Liverpool - went into the big bookshop there and just came out with I mean, books for two and six pence. So, you can imagine how many books I could get for £60. And I just took everything I could find on philosophy and history and introductory science and stuff like that and just consumed it. Ula Ojiaku:  Wow, it seemed like you already knew what you wanted even before winning the prize money, you seem to have had a wish list... Dave Snowden:  I mean, actually interesting, and the big things in the EU field guide on (managing) complexity which was just issued. You need to build…, You need to stop saying, ‘this is the problem, we will find the solution' to saying, ‘how do I build capability, that can solve problems we haven't yet anticipated?' And I think that's part of the problem in education. Because my children didn't have that benefit. They had a modular education. Yeah, we did a set of exams at 16 and a set of exams that 18 and between those periods, we could explore it (i.e. options) and we had to hold everything in our minds for those two periods, right? For my children, it was do a module, pass a test, get a mark, move on, forget it move on. So, it's very compartmentalized, yeah? And it's also quite instrumentalist. We, I think we were given an education as much in how to learn and have had to find things out. And the debating tradition was that; you didn't know what you're going to get hit with. So, you read everything, and you thought about it, and you learn to think on your feet. And I think that that sort of a broad switch, it started to happen in the 80s, along with a lot of other bad things in management. And this is when systems thinking started to dominate. And we moved to an engineering metaphor. And you can see it in cybernetics and everything else, it's an attempt to define everything as a machine. And of course, machines are designed for a purpose, whereas ecosystems evolve for resilience. And I think that's kind of like where I, my generation were and it's certainly what we're trying to bring back in now in sort of in terms of practice. Ula Ojiaku:  I have an engineering background and a computer science background. These days, I'm developing a newfound love for philosophy, psychology, law and, you know, intersect, how do all these concepts intersect? Because as human beings we're complex, we're not machines where you put the program in and you expect it to come out the same, you know, it's not going to be the same for every human being. What do you think about that? Dave Snowden:  Yeah. And I think, you know, we know more on this as well. So, we know the role of art in human evolution is being closely linked to innovation. So, art comes before language. So, abstraction allows you to make novel connections. So, if you focus entirely on STEM education, you're damaging the human capacity to innovate. And we're, you know, as creatures, we're curious. You know. And I mean, we got this whole concept of our aporia, which is key to connecting that, which is creating a state of deliberate confusion, or a state of paradox. And the essence of a paradox is you can't resolve it. So, you're forced to think differently. So, the famous case on this is the liar's paradox, alright? I mean, “I always lie”. That just means I lied. So, if that means I was telling the truth. So, you've got to think differently about the problem. I mean, you've seen those paradoxes do the same thing. So that, that deliberate act of creating confusion so people can see novelty is key. Yeah. Umm and if you don't find… finding ways to do that, so when we looked at it, we looked at linguistic aporia, aesthetic aporia and physical aporia. So, I got some of the… one of the defining moments of insight on Cynefin was looking at Caravaggio`s paintings in Naples. When I realized I've been looking for the idea of the liminality. And that was, and then it all came together, right? So those are the trigger points requiring a more composite way of learning. I think it's also multiculturalism, to be honest. I mean, I, when I left university, I worked on the World Council of Churches come, you know program to combat racism. Ula Ojiaku:  Yes, I'd like to know more about that. That's one of my questions… Dave Snowden:  My mother was a good atheist, but she made me read the Bible on the basis, I wouldn't understand European literature otherwise, and the penetration guys, I became a Catholic so… Now, I mean, that that was fascinating, because I mean, I worked on Aboriginal land rights in Northern Australia, for example. And that was when I saw an activist who was literally murdered in front of me by a security guard. And we went to the police. And they said, it's only an Abo. And I still remember having fights in Geneva, because South Africa was a tribal conflict with a racial overlay. I mean, Africa, and its Matabele Zulu, arrived in South Africa together and wiped out the native population. And if you don't understand that, you don't understand the Matabele betrayal. You don't understand what happened. It doesn't justify apartheid. And one of the reasons there was a partial reconciliation, is it actually was a tribal conflict. And the ritual actually managed that. Whereas in Australia, in comparison was actually genocide. Yeah, it wasn't prejudice, it was genocide. I mean, until 1970s, there, were still taking half -breed children forcibly away from their parents, inter-marrying them in homes, to breed them back to white. And those are, I think, yeah, a big market. I argued this in the UK, I said, one of the things we should actually have is bring back national service. I couldn't get the Labor Party to adopt it. I said, ‘A: Because it would undermine the Conservatives, because they're the ones who talk about that sort of stuff. But we should allow it to be overseas.' So, if you put two years into working in communities, which are poorer than yours, round about that 18 to 21-year-old bracket, then we'll pay for your education. If you don't, you'll pay fees. Because you proved you want to give to society. And that would have been… I think, it would have meant we'd have had a generation of graduates who understood the world because that was part of the objective. I mean, I did that I worked on worked in South Africa, on the banks of Zimbabwe on the audits of the refugee camps around that fight. And in Sao Paulo, in the slums, some of the work of priests. You can't come back from that and not be changed. And I think it's that key formative period, we need to give people. Ula Ojiaku:  True and like you said, at that age, you know, when you're young and impressionable, it helps with what broadening your worldview to know that the world is bigger than your father's … compound (backyard)… Dave Snowden:  That's the worst problem in Agile, because what, you've got a whole class of, mainly white males and misogynism in Agile is really bad. It's one of the worst areas for misogyny still left, right, in terms of where it works. Ula Ojiaku:  I'm happy you are the one saying it not me… Dave Snowden:  Well, no, I mean, it is it's quite appalling. And so, what you've actually got is, is largely a bunch of white male game players who spent their entire time on computers. Yeah, when you take and run seriously after puberty, and that's kind of like a dominant culture. And that's actually quite dangerous, because it lacks, it lacks cultural diversity, it lacks ethnic diversity, it lacks educational diversity. And I wrote an article for ITIL, recently, which has been published, which said, no engineers should be allowed out, without training in ethics. Because the implications of what software engineers do now are huge. And the problem we've got, and this is a really significant, it's a big data problem as well. And you see it with a behavioral economic economist and the nudge theory guys - all of whom grab these large-scale data manipulations is that they're amoral, they're not immoral, they're amoral. And that's actually always more scary. It's this sort of deep level instrumentalism about the numbers; the numbers tell me what I need to say. Ula Ojiaku:  And also, I mean, just building on what you've said, there are instances, for example, in artificial intelligence is really based on a sample set from a select group, and it doesn't necessarily recognize things that are called ‘outliers'. You know, other races… Dave Snowden:  I mean, I've worked in that in all my life now back 20, 25 years ago. John Poindexter and I were on a stage in a conference in Washington. This was sort of early days of our work on counter terrorism. And somebody asked about black box AI and I said, nobody's talking about the training data sets. And I've worked in AI from the early days, all right, and the training data sets matter and nobody bothered. They just assumed… and you get people publishing books which say correlation is causation, which is deeply worrying, right? And I think Google is starting to acknowledge that, but it's actually very late. And the biases which… we were looking at a software tool the other day, it said it can, it can predict 85% of future events around culture. Well, it can only do that by constraining how executive see culture, so it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. And then the recruitment algorithms will only recruit people who match that cultural expectation and outliers will be eliminated. There's an HBO film coming up shortly on Myers Briggs. Now, Myers Briggs is known to be a pseudo-science. It has no basis whatsoever in any clinical work, and even Jung denied it, even though it's meant to be based on his work. But it's beautiful for HR departments because it allows them to put people into little categories. And critically it abrogates, judgment, and that's what happened with systems thinking in the 80s 90s is everything became spreadsheets and algorithms. So, HR departments would produce… instead of managers making decisions based on judgment, HR departments would force them into profile curves, to allocate resources. Actually, if you had a high performing team who were punished, because the assumption was teams would not have more than… Ula Ojiaku:  Bell curve... Dave Snowden:  …10 percent high performance in it. All right. Ula Ojiaku:  Yeah. Dave Snowden:  And this sort of nonsense has been running in the 80s, 90s and it coincided with… three things came together. One was the popularization of systems thinking. And unfortunately, it got popularized around things like process reengineering and learning organization. So that was a hard end. And Sanghi's pious can the sort of the, the soft end of it, right? But both of them were highly directional. It was kind of like leaders decide everything follows. Yeah. And that coincided with the huge growth of computing - the ability to handle large volumes of information. And all of those sorts of things came together in this sort of perfect storm, and we lost a lot of humanity in the process. Ula Ojiaku:  Do you think there's hope for us to regain the humanity in the process? Because it seems like the tide is turning from, I mean, there is still an emphasis, in my view, on systems thinking, however, there is the growing realization that we have, you know, knowledge workers and people… Dave Snowden:  Coming to the end of its park cycle, I see that all right. I can see it with the amount of cybernetics fanboys, and they are all boys who jump on me every time I say something about complexity, right? So, I think they're feeling threatened. And the field guide is significant, because it's a government, you know, government can like publication around effectively taken an ecosystems approach, not a cybernetic approach. And there's a book published by a good friend of mine called Terry Eagleton, who's… I don't think he's written a bad book. And he's written about 30, or 40. I mean, the guy just produces his stuff. It's called “Hope without Optimism”. And I think, hope is… I mean, Moltman just also published an update of his Theology of Hope, which is worth reading, even if you're not religious. But hope is one of those key concepts, right, you should… to lose hope is a sin. But hope is not the same thing as optimism. In fact, pessimistic people who hope actually are probably the ones who make a difference, because they're not naive, right? And this is my objection to the likes of Sharma Ga Sengi, and the like, is they just gather people together to talk about how things should be. And of course, everything should be what, you know, white MIT, educated males think the world should be like. I mean, it's very culturally imperialist in that sort of sense. And then nobody changes because anybody can come together in the workshop and agree how things should be. It's when you make a difference in the field that it counts, you've got to create a micro difference. This is hyper localization, you got to create lots and lots of micro differences, which will stimulate the systems, the system will change. I think, three things that come together, one is COVID. The other is global warming. And the other is, and I prefer to call it the epistemic justice movement, though, that kind of like fits in with Black Lives Matter. But epistemic justice doesn't just affect people who are female or black. I mean, if you come to the UK and see the language about the Welsh and the Irish, or the jokes made about the Welsh in BBC, right? The way we use language can designate people in different ways and I think that's a big movement, though. And it's certainly something we develop software for. So, I think those three come together, and I think the old models aren't going to be sustainable. I mean, the cost is going to be terrible. I mean, the cost to COVID is already bad. And we're not getting this thing as long COVID, it's permanent COVID. And people need to start getting used to that. And I think that's, that's going to change things. So, for example, in the village I live in Wiltshire. Somebody's now opened an artisan bakery in their garage and it's brilliant. And everybody's popping around there twice a week and just buying the bread and having a chat on the way; socially-distanced with masks, of course. And talking of people, that sort of thing is happening a lot. COVID has forced people into local areas and forced people to realise the vulnerability of supply chains. So, you can see changes happening there. The whole Trump phenomenon, right, and the Boris murmuring in the UK is ongoing. It's just as bad as the Trump phenomenon. It's the institutionalization of corruption as a high level. Right? Those sorts of things trigger change, right? Not without cost, change never comes without cost, but it just needs enough… It needs local action, not international action. I think that's the key principle. To get a lot of people to accept things like the Paris Accord on climate change, and you've got to be prepared to make sacrifices. And it's too distant a time at the moment, it has to become a local issue for the international initiatives to actually work and we're seeing that now. I mean… Ula Ojiaku:  It sounds like, sorry to interrupt - it sounds like what you're saying is, for the local action, for change to happen, it has to start with us as individuals… Dave Snowden:  The disposition… No, not with individuals. That's actually very North American, the North European way of thinking right. The fundamental kind of basic identity structure of humans is actually clans, not individuals. Ula Ojiaku:  Clans... Dave Snowden:  Yeah. Extended families, clans; it's an ambiguous word. We actually evolved for those. And you need it at that level, because that's a high level of social interaction and social dependency. And it's like, for example, right? I'm dyslexic. Right? Yeah. If I don't see if, if the spelling checker doesn't pick up a spelling mistake, I won't see it. And I read a whole page at a time. I do not read it sentence by sentence. All right. And I can't understand why people haven't seen the connections I make, because they're obvious, right? Equally, there's a high degree of partial autism in the Agile community, because that goes with mathematical ability and thing, and that this so-called education deficiencies, and the attempt to define an ideal individual is a mistake, because we evolved to have these differences. Ula Ojiaku:  Yes. Dave Snowden:  Yeah. And the differences understood that the right level of interaction can change things. So, I think the unit is clan, right for extended family, or extended, extended interdependence. Ula Ojiaku:  Extended interdependence… Dave Snowden:  We're seeing that in the village. I mean, yeah, this is classic British atomistic knit, and none of our relatives live anywhere near us. But the independence in the village is increasing with COVID. And therefore, people are finding relationships and things they can do together. Now, once that builds to a critical mass, and it does actually happen exponentially, then bigger initiatives are possible. And this is some of the stuff we were hoping to do in the US shortly on post-election reconciliation. And the work we've been doing in Malmo, in refugees and elsewhere in the world, right, is you change the nature of localized interaction with national visibility, so that you can measure the dispositional state of the system. And then you can nudge the system when it's ready to change, because then the energy cost of change is low. But that requires real time feedback loops in distributed human sensor networks, which is a key issue in the field guide. And the key thing that comes back to your original question on AI, is, the internet at the moment is an unbuffered feedback loop. Yeah, where you don't know the source of the data, and you can't control the source of the data. And any network like that, and this is just apriori science factor, right will always become perverted. Ula Ojiaku:  And what do you mean by term apriori? Dave Snowden:  Oh, before the facts, you don't need to, we don't need to wait for evidence. It's like in an agile, you can look at something like SAFe® which case claims to scale agile and just look at it you say it's apriori wrong (to) a scale a complex system. So, it's wrong. All right. End of argument right. Now let's talk about the details, right. So yeah, so that's, you know, that's coming back. The hyper localization thing is absolutely key on that, right? And the same is true to be honest in software development. A lot of our work now is to understand the unarticulated needs of users. And then shift technology in to actually meet those unarticulated needs. And that requires a complex approach to architecture, in which people and technology are objects with defined interactions around scaffolding structures, so that applications can emerge in resilience, right? And that's actually how local communities evolve as well. So, we've now got the theoretical constructs and a lot of the practical methods to actually… And I've got a series of blog posts - which I've got to get back to writing - called Rewilding Agile. And rewilding isn't returning to the original state, it's restoring balance. So, if you increase the number of human actors as your primary sources, and I mean human actors, not as people sitting on (in front of) computer screens who can be faked or mimicked, yeah? … and entirely working on text, which is about 10%, of what we know, dangerous, it might become 80% of what we know and then you need to panic. Right? So, you know, by changing those interactions, increasing the human agency in the system, that's how you come to, that's how you deal with fake news. It's not by writing better algorithms, because then it becomes a war with the guys faking the news, and you're always gonna lose. Ula Ojiaku:  So, what do you consider yourself, a person of faith? Dave Snowden:  Yeah. Ula Ojiaku:  Why? Dave Snowden:  Oh, faith is like hope and charity. I mean, they're the great virtues… I didn't tell you I got into a lot in trouble in the 70s. Dave Snowden:  I wrote an essay that said Catholicism, Marxism and Hinduism were ontologically identical and should be combined and we're different from Protestantism and capitalism, which are also ontologically identical (and) it can be combined. Ula Ojiaku:  Is this available in the public domain? Dave Snowden:  I doubt it. I think it actually got me onto a heresy trial at one point, but that but I would still say that. Ula Ojiaku:  That's amazing. Can we then move to the framework that Cynefin framework, how did it evolve into what we know it as today? Dave Snowden:  I'll do a high-level summary, but I wrote it up at length in the book and I didn't know I was writing for the book. The book was a surprise that they put together for me. I thought that was just writing an extended blog post. It started when I was working in IBM is it originates from the work of Max Borrasso was my mentor for years who tragically died early. But he was looking at abstraction, codification and diffusion. We did a fair amount of work together, I took two of those aspects and started to look at informal and formal communities in IBM, and its innovation. And some of the early articles on Cynefin, certainly the early ones with the five domains come from that period. And at that time, we had access labels. Yeah. And then then complexity theory came into it. So, it shifted into being a complexity framework. And it stayed … The five domains were fairly constant for a fairly long period of time, they changed their names a bit. The central domain I knew was important, but didn't have as much prominence as it does now. And then I introduced liminality, partly driven by agile people, actually, because they could they couldn't get the concept there were dynamics and domains. So, they used to say things like, ‘look, Scrum is a dynamic. It's a way of shifting complex to complicated' and people say ‘no, the scrum guide said it's about complex.' And you think, ‘oh, God, Stacey has a lot to answer for' but… Ula Ojiaku: Who`s Stacey? Dave Snowden:  Ralph Stacey. So, he was the guy originally picked up by Ken when he wrote the Scrum Guide… Ula Ojiaku:  Right. Okay. Dave Snowden:  Stacey believes everything's complex, which is just wrong, right? So, either way, Cynefin evolved with the liminal aspects. And then the last resolution last year, which is… kind of completes Cynefin to be honest, there's some refinements… was when we realized that the central domain was confused, or operatic. And that was the point where you started. So, you didn't start by putting things into the domain, you started in the operatic. And then you moved aspects of things into the different domains. So that was really important. And it got picked up in Agile, ironically, by the XP community. So, I mean, I was in IT most of my life, I was one of the founders of the DSDM Consortium, and then moved sideways from that, and was working in counterterrorism and other areas, always you're working with technology, but not in the Agile movement. Cynefin is actually about the same age as Agile, it started at the same time. And the XP community in London invited me in, and I still think Agile would have been better if it had been built on XP, not Scrum. But it wouldn't have scaled with XP, I mean, without Scrum it would never have scaled it. And then it got picked up. And I think one of the reasons it got picked up over Stacey is, it said order is possible. It didn't say everything is complex. And virtually every Agile method I know of value actually focuses on making complex, complicated. Ula Ojiaku:  Yes. Dave Snowden:  And that's its power. What they're… what is insufficient of, and this is where we've been working is what I call pre-Scrum techniques. Techniques, which define what should go into that process. Right, because all of the Agile methods still tend to be a very strong manufacturing metaphor - manufacturing ideas. So, they assume somebody will tell them what they have to produce. And that actually is a bad way of thinking about IT. Technology needs to co-evolve. And users can't articulate what they want, because they don't know what technology can do. Ula Ojiaku:  True. But are you saying… because in Agile fundamentally, it's really about making sure there's alignment as well that people are working on the right thing per time, but you're not telling them how to do it? Dave Snowden:  Well, yes and no - all right. I mean, it depends what you're doing. I mean, some Agile processes, yes. But if you go through the sort of safe brain remain processes, very little variety within it, right? And self-organization happens within the context of a user executive and retrospectives. Right, so that's its power. And, but if you look at it, it took a really good technique called time-boxing, and it reduced it to a two-week sprint. Now, that's one aspect of time boxing. I mean, I've got a whole series of blog posts next week on this, because time boxing is a hugely valuable technique. It says there's minimal deliverable project, and maximum deliverable product and a minimal level of resource and a maximum level of resource. And the team commits to deliver on the date. Ula Ojiaku:  To accurate quality… to a quality standard. Dave Snowden:  Yeah, so basically, you know that the worst case, you'll get the minimum product at the maximum cost, but you know, you'll get it on that date. So, you can deal with it, alright. And that's another technique we've neglected. We're doing things which force high levels of mutation and requirements over 24 hours, before they get put into a Scrum process. Because if you just take what users want, you know, there's been insufficient co-evolution with the technology capability. And so, by the time you deliver it, the users will probably realize they should have asked for something different anyway. Ula Ojiaku:  So, does this tie in with the pre-Scrum techniques you mentioned earlier? If so, can you articulate that? Dave Snowden:  So, is to say different methods in different places. And that's again, my opposition to things like SAFe, to a lesser extent LeSS, and so on, right, is they try and put everything into one bloody big flow diagram. Yeah. And that's messy. All right? Well, it's a recipe, not a chef. What the chef does is they put different ingredients together in different combinations. So, there's modularity of knowledge, but it's not forced into a linear process. So, our work… and we just got an open space and open source and our methods deliberately, right, in terms of the way it works, is I can take Scrum, and I can reduce it to its lowest coherent components, like a sprint or retrospective. I can combine those components with components for another method. So, I can create Scrum as an assembly of components, I can take those components compared with other components. And that way, you get novelty. So, we're then developing components which sit before traditional stuff. Like for example, triple eight, right? This was an old DSDM method. So, you ran a JAD sessions and Scrum has forgotten about JAD. JAD is a really…  joint application design… is a really good set of techniques - they're all outstanding. You throw users together with coders for two days, and you force out some prototypes. Yeah, that latching on its own would, would transform agile, bringing that back in spades, right? We did is we do an eight-hour JAD session say, in London, and we pass it on to a team in Mumbai. But we don't tell them what the users ask for. They just get the prototype. And they can do whatever they want with it for eight hours. And then they hand it over to a team in San Francisco, who can do whatever they want with it in eight hours. And it comes back. And every time I've run this, the user said, ‘God, I wouldn't have thought of that, can I please, have it?' So, what you're doing is a limited life cycle -  you get the thing roughly defined, then you allow it to mutate without control, and then you look at the results and decide what you want to do. And that's an example of pre-scrum technique, that is a lot more economical than systems and analysts and user executives and storyboards. And all those sorts of things. Yeah. Ula Ojiaku:  Well, I see what you mean, because it seems like the, you know, the JAD - the joint application design technique allows for emergent design, and you shift the decision making closer to the people who are at the forefront. And to an extent my understanding of, you know, Scrum … I mean, some agile frameworks - that's also what they promote… Dave Snowden:  Oh, they don't really don't. alright. They picked up Design Thinking which is quite interesting at the moment. If you if you look at Agile and Design Thinking. They're both at the end of their life cycles. Ula Ojiaku:  Why do you say that? Dave Snowden:  Because they're being commodified. The way you know, something is coming to the end of its life cycle is when it becomes highly commodified. So, if you look at it, look at what they are doing the moment, the Double Diamond is now a series of courses with certificates. And I mean, Agile started with bloody certificates, which is why it's always been slightly diverse in the way it works. I mean, this idea that you go on a three-day course and get a certificate, you read some slides every year and pay some money and get another certificate is fundamentally corrupt. But most of the Agile business is built on it, right? I mean, I've got three sets of methods after my name. But they all came from yearlong or longer courses certified by university not from tearing apart a course. Yeah, or satisfying a peer group within a very narrow cultural or technical definition of competence. So, I think yeah, and you can see that with Design Thinking. So, it's expert ideation, expert ethnography. And it still falls into that way of doing things. Yeah. And you can see it, people that are obsessed with running workshops that they facilitate. And that's the problem. I mean, the work we're doing on citizen engagement is actually… has no bloody facilitators in it. As all the evidence is that the people who turn up are culturally biased about their representative based opinions. And the same is true if you want to look at unarticulated needs, you can't afford to have the systems analysts finding them because they see them from their perspective. And this is one of one science, right? You did not see what you do not expect to see. We know that, alright? So, you're not going to see outliers. And so, the minute you have an expert doing something, it's really good - where you know, the bounds of the expertise, cover all the possibilities, and it's really dangerous. Well, that's not the case. Ula Ojiaku:  So, could you tell me a bit more about the unfacilitated sessions you mentioned earlier? Dave Snowden:  They're definitely not sessions, so we didn't like what were triggers at moments. Ula Ojiaku:  Okay. Dave Snowden:  So, defining roles. So, for example, one of the things I would do and have done in IT, is put together, young, naive, recently graduated programmer with older experienced tester or software architect. So, somebody without any… Ula Ojiaku:  Prejudice or pre-conceived idea... Dave Snowden:  … preferably with a sort of grandparent age group between them as well. I call it, the grandparents syndrome - grandparents say things to their grandchildren they won't tell their children and vice versa. If you maximize the age gap, there's actually freer information flow because there's no threat in the process. And then we put together with users trained to talk to IT people. So, in a month's time, I'll publish that as a training course. So, training users to talk to IT people is more economical than trying to train IT people to understand users. Ula Ojiaku:  To wrap up then, based on what you said, you know, about Cynefin, and you know, the wonderful ideas behind Cynefin. How can leaders in organizations in any organization apply these and in how they make sense of the world and, you know, take decisions? Dave Snowden:  Well, if there's actually a sensible way forward now, so we've just published the field guide on managing complexity.  Ula Ojiaku:  Okay. Dave Snowden:  And that is actually, it's a sort of ‘Chef's guide'. It has four stages: assess, adapt, exert, transcend, and within that it has things you could do. So, it's not a list of qualities, it's a list of practical things you should go and do tomorrow, and those things we're building at the moment with a lot of partners, because we won't try and control this; this needs to be open. Here's an assessment process that people will go through to decide where they are. So that's going to be available next week on our website. Ula Ojiaku:  Oh, fantastic! Dave Snowden:  For the initial registration.  Other than that, and there's a whole body of stuff on how to use Cynefin. And as I said, we just open source on the methods. So, the Wiki is open source. These… from my point of view, we're now at the stage where the market is going to expand very quickly. And to be honest, I, you know, I've always said traditionally use cash waiver as an example of this. The reason that Agile scaled around Scrum is he didn't make it an elite activity, which XP was. I love the XP guys, but they can't communicate with ordinary mortals. Yeah. It takes you about 10 minutes to tune into the main point, and even you know the field, right. And he (Jeff Sutherland) made the Scrum Guide open source. And that way it's great, right. And I think that that's something which people just don't get strategic with. They, in early stages, you should keep things behind firewalls. When the market is ready to expand, you take the firewalls away fast. Because I mean, getting behind firewalls initially to maintain coherence so they don't get diluted too quickly, or what I call “hawks being made into pigeons”. Yeah. But the minute the market is starting to expand, that probably means you've defined it so you release the firewall so the ideas spread very quickly, and you accept the degree of diversity on it. So that's the reason we put the Wiki. Ula Ojiaku:  Right. So, are there any books that you would recommend, for anyone who wants to learn more about what you've talked about so far. Dave Snowden:  You would normally produce the theory book, then the field book, but we did it the other way around. So, Mary and I are working on three to five books, which will back up the Field Guide. Ula Ojiaku:  Is it Mary Boone? Dave Snowden:  Mary Boone. She knows how to write to the American managers, which I don't, right… without losing integrity. So that's coming, right. If you go onto the website, I've listed all the books I read. I don't think… there are some very, very good books around complexity, but they're deeply specialized, they're academic. Gerard's book is just absolutely brilliant but it's difficult to understand if you don't have a philosophy degree. And there are some awfully tripe books around complexity - nearly all of the popular books I've seen, I wouldn't recommend. Yeah. Small Groups of Complex Adaptive Systems is probably quite a good one that was published about 20 years ago. Yeah, but that we got a book list on the website. So, I would look at that. Ula Ojiaku:  Okay. Thank you so much for that. Do you have any ask of the audience and how can they get to you? Dave Snowden:  We've open-sourced the Wiki, you know, to create a critical mass, I was really pleased we have 200 people volunteered to help populate it. So, we get the all the methods in the field guide them. And they're actively working at that at the moment, right, and on a call with them later. And to be honest, I've done 18-hour days, the last two weeks, but 8 hours of each of those days has been talking to the methods with a group of people Academy 5, that's actually given me a lot of energy, because it's huge. So, get involved, I think it's the best way… you best understand complexity by getting the principles and then practicing it. And the key thing I'll leave us with is the metaphor. I mentioned it a few times - a recipe book user has a recipe, and they follow it. And if they don't have the right ingredients, and if they don't have the right equipment, they can't operate. Or they say it's not ‘true Agile'. A chef understands the theory of cooking and has got served in apprenticeship. So, their fingers know how to do things. And that's… we need… a downside.. more chefs, which is the combination of theory and practice. And the word empirical is hugely corrupted in the Agile movement. You know, basically saying, ‘this worked for me' or ‘it worked for me the last three times' is the most dangerous way of moving forward. Ula Ojiaku:  Because things change and what worked yesterday might not work Dave Snowden:  And you won't be aware of what worked or didn't work and so on. Ula Ojiaku:  And there's some bias in that. Wouldn't you say? Dave Snowden:  We've got an attentional blindness if you've got Ula Ojiaku:  Great. And Dave, where can people find you? Are you on social media? Dave Snowden:  Cognitive. Yeah, social media is @snowded. Yeah. LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter. Two websites – the Cognitive Edge website, which is where I blog, and there's a new Cynefin Center website now, which is a not-for-profit arm. Ula Ojiaku:  Okay. All these would be in the show notes. Thank you so much for your time, Dave. It's been a pleasure speaking with you. Dave Snowden:  Okay. Thanks a lot.

Join Robert Ellsberg in this One on One interview with author, Kathleen Deignan, as they discuss "Thomas Berry: A Book of Hours".https://maryknoll.link/e26ccdIn her latest book with Orbis, Kathleen Deignan offers readers a unique encounter with the spirituality of Thomas Berry, a Passionist priest, ecological prophet, and self-described “geologian.” Berry recounted the “universe story,” describing our place in the earth community, and defined the “great work” before of us: to develop a consciousness capable of sustaining life on this planet. Following the format of previous breviaries, drawn from the work of Teilhard de Chardin and Thomas Merton, this Book of Hours is arranged under themes divided into Eight days. Each day includes prayers, hymns, and readings for the four parts of the day: Dawn, Day, Dusk, and Dark.Get 25% off Thomas Berry: A Book of Hours by Kathleen Deignan through 30 April 2025https://maryknoll.link/e26ccdKathleen Deignan, CND, PhD, is a sister of the Congregation of Notre Dame, a teaching theologian, and founder of the Deignan Institute for Earth and Spirit at Iona College. A student of Thomas Berry while studying at Fordham University, she is a convener of the Thomas Berry Forum for Ecological Dialogue and a GreenFaith Fellow engaged in interfaith environmental leadership. President Emerita of the International Thomas Merton Society, her books include Thomas Merton: A Book of Hours (Sorin Books) and (as co-editor), Teilhard de Chardin: A Book of Hours (Orbis).#ThomasBerry  #EcologicalSpirituality  #BookOfHours #OrbisBooks #RobertEllsberg #KathleenDeignan

Gerald Holtom's CND symbol, known internationally as the ‘peace' symbol, made its debut at a protest march by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament on 4th April, 1958.  The march went from London to Aldermaston, where Britain's nuclear weapons were and still are manufactured. Five hundred cardboard ‘lollipop sticks' displaying the logo were produced - and it's since scarcely been out of circulation as an anti-establishment plea for peace around the world. In this episode, Arion, Rebecca and Olly question whether Goya helped influence Holton's iconic design; reveal how author J.B. Priestley had fermented the protests on this day; and consider the International Shoe Corporation's dubious claim to the patent …  Further Reading: • ‘The Peace Symbol: Beginnings and Evolution' (ThoughtCo, 2019): https://www.thoughtco.com/the-peace-symbol-1779351# • ‘He gave his unforgettable work for nothing. Shouldn't the designer of the peace symbol be commemorated?' (The Guardian, 2015): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/28/shouldnt-british-designer-gerard-holtom-of-peace-symbol-be-commemorated-paris-attacks • ‘Walter Wolfgang: 'why I marched to Aldermaston in 1958' (CND, 2018): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLqBUws7R8E #50s #UK #War #Design Love the show? Support us!  Join 

Buon venerdì Stupefan!Come promesso la scorsa settimana, anche in questo episodio vi portiamo a Vienna, per recuperare le fasi finali della 68° Commission on Narcotic Drugs, il consesso delle Nazioni Unite preposto alla definizione delle politiche sulle droghe a livello internazionale. Parleremo delle sostanze che il CND ha tabellato, passeremo per il voto delle risoluzioni e dalla posizione dei singoli stati sulle decisioni prese. Cosa succede se le politiche Trumpiane si insinuano anche nelle assemblee onu sulle droghe? Quali sono state le risoluzioni più importanti? Cosa è cambiato dalla Midterm Review dello scorso anno? Lo scopriremo insieme, ma solo dopo una doverosa apertura sulla strage silenziosa, del diritto e delle persone, che si sta compiendo all'interno delle carceri del nostro Paese. È tutto pronto? Allora è il momento di cliccare play! Note dell'episodio:- Ancora record di suicidi in carcere: https://www.notizie.com/2025/03/20/da-gennaio-di-questanno-20-suicidi-in-carcere-perche-la-situazione-nelle-carceri-e-drammatica/ - Le sostanze tabellate: https://www.aboutpharma.com/sanita-e-politica/entrano-sotto-il-controllo-internazionale-5-nuove-sostanze-psicoattive-4-oppioidi-sintetici-e-un-farmaco/ - Le risoluzioni votate: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/commissions/CND/session/68_Session_2025/draft_proposals_draft_reports.html - Tutte le conclusioni del CND: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/frontpage/2025/March/cnd-68-concludes_-six-new-substances-controlled-six-resolutions-adopted.html - La posizione ufficiale americana: https://vienna.usmission.gov/explanations-of-votes-by-the-u-s-delegation-on-resolutions-at-the-68th-commission-on-narcotic-drugs/ - Se si rompe il sistema, il ruolo della società civile al CND: https://www.fuoriluogo.it/speciali/cronache-da-vienna/il-sistema-si-e-rotto-la-dichiarazione-di-idpc/ - La Midterm Review 2024 e il voto sulla riduzione del danno: https://www.fuoriluogo.it/mappamondo/overdose-e-riduzione-del-danno-la-risoluzione-della-cnd/ - Una guida al funzionamento del CND: https://www.fuoriluogo.it/oltrelacarta/video/guida-al-funzionamento-della-commission-on-narcotic-drugs-cnd/ Entra in contatto con noi usando la mail stupefatticast@gmail.com o seguendo su Instagram il @stupefatti_podcast!  Puoi anche iscriverti a STUPEGRAM, il nostro canale telegram, a questo link https://t.me/stupegram!

Buon venerdì Stupefan!!!Non immaginerete mai dove vi portiamo oggi: dentro (ma proprio dentro) la 68º sessione della Commission on Narcotic Drugs dell'ONU! La nostra Bibi è a Vienna per conto di Meglio Legale che da due anni ha ricevuto lo status consultivo come ong italiana che si occupa di politiche sulle droghe e non potevamo non cogliere questa ghiotta occasione. Ma cosa si fa a un evento del genere? Chi c'è? E, soprattutto, cosa si decide? Ve lo raccontiamo nell'episodio di oggi (ma anche nel prossimo), ma solo dopo avervi dato l'aggiornamento che vi avevamo promesso sulle Filippine e sul recente arresto dell'ex presidente Duterte. È tutto pronto? Allora play! Note dell'episodio: - Duterte arrestato: https://www.unita.it/2025/03/12/cosi-la-cpi-ha-fatto-arrestare-rodrigo-duterte-lex-presidente-delle-filippine-accusato-di-crimini-contro-lumanita/amp/ - Cosa succede adesso a Duterte: https://www.ilpost.it/2025/03/13/rodrigo-duterte-processo-corte-penale-internazionale/ - Il CND: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/commissions/CND/index.html - L'intervento di Mantovano: https://www.governo.it/it/articolo/il-sottosegretario-mantovano-alla-alla-68esima-sessione-della-commissione-droga-delle - Qui tutti gli eventi della 68º sessione: https://cndapp.org/ Entra in contatto con noi usando la mail stupefatticast@gmail.com o seguendo su Instagram il @stupefatti_podcast!  Puoi anche iscriverti a STUPEGRAM, il nostro canale telegram, a questo link https://t.me/stupegram!

¿Ustedes están al tanto de la importancia que tiene la Corporación Nacional para el Desarrollo (CND) en la construcción de infraestructura pública? ¿Saben que esta institución está detrás del mejoramiento de rutas, la construcción de viviendas, liceos, escuelas, y también está detrás de obras saneamiento? ¿O que juega su papel en megainversiones como el Ferrocarril Central y el Proyecto Neptuno? Este organismo de derecho público no estatal está involucrado en casi mil proyectos en todo el país por un total de 4.000 millones de dólares. Su tarea consiste en administrar y ejecutar fondos de inversión para infraestructura pública, y también planificar y gerenciar obras. Por esos servicios percibe ingresos y por las ganancias que obtiene vuelca recursos al Estado. De hecho desde 2020, la CND remitió utilidades al Estado por 45 millones de dólares. De esa suma, 25 millones se destinaron al Fondo Covid, creado durante la pandemia. Y a partir de 2023 la CND cedió una partida de 10 millones por año para el financiamiento de programas de ciencia e investigación. Como ustedes irán notando, la CND termina teniendo un peso importante en la economía nacional pero seguramente no está en el radar de todo el mundo; tal vez incluso algunos directamente no la han escuchado nombrar. Profundizamos En Perspectiva sobre la CND, el papel que juega y el balance al cierre de este período de gobierno, con su gerente general, el contador Sergio Fernández.

We are well into 2025 so saying Happy New Year is not appropriate anymore. I think now people are asking others how they are doing with their resolutions. I have just one goal this year and that is to learn something new. I'll let you know how I do. Send me your resolutions in the comment section. I am excited for you to listen to my conversation with Dr. Brian Fiske, Chief Scientist for the MJFF. I like to kick off the new year/new season with a medication update. This year we are going to get an update on the research landscape and what it means compared to previous years. There are therapies in various stages of clinical testing using several different therapeutic approaches.  It is exciting to learn about what to expect in the future and how we all can contribute to move things forward faster. Let's learn from Dr. Fiske what we now know about the biology of Parkinson's, genetics and the environment's contribution, the advances in testing for a Parkinson's diagnosis, and where we stand in slowing the progression of the disease. This podcast is sponsored by  CND Life Sciences, home of the Syn-One Test ® - the first commercially available skin-based test to help clinicians diagnose Parkinson's and related disorders. CND Life Sciences supports the care of patients facing the potential diagnosis of a neurodegenerative disease. CND's Syn-One Test® helps clinicians to diagnose suspected synucleinopathies using skin biopsies to detect, visualize, and quantify phosphorylated alpha-synuclein located in nerves in the skin. The Syn-One Test is performed in CND's CLIA-certified and CAP-accredited laboratory located in Scottsdale, AZ.   https://www.michaeljfox.org/state-field https://www.michaeljfox.org/ppmi https://www.michaeljfox.org/trial-finder https://cndlifesciences.com/ https://cndlifesciences.com/syn-one-test/  

An update on the upcoming Season 3 of the Down and Dirty Podcast and details of a new podcast from CND.

Welcome to part 7 of Gyles reading from the diaries he has kept since he was 10. Gyles is now 14, and a pupil at Bedales, a progressive Hampshire boarding school populated by many CND-supporting teachers and the children of liberal-minded, artistic parents. In this episode we hear about Gyles's summer holidays, spent on his own in Paris, learning French and staying in a boarding house. We hear about his success in the school production. We hear about his teachers - many of whom are "very CND" and some of whom are, shock horror, vegetarian. We hear Gyles's review of the best bits of 1962 and about the records he's enjoyed listening to that year. If you've only just discovered these episodes, you can either start here, or go back to episode 1 of the diaries and start at the beginning (when Gyles was at prep school). Enjoy this. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week we're talking about a highly discussed topic: CBD for your dogs! There is so much information and misinformation out there about CND products and what they can or can't do for your dogs. We discuss the validity of some of the claims of these products as well as where they are getting the information from to make those claims. If you've been using CBD for your dogs you may want to do some research! Thanks so much for listening and be sure to subscribe and review! Also, send us a message on Facebook or Instagram if you have a dog related topic you'd like to hear us discuss!

Aujourd'hui, je reçois Maëva Lamolière, chercheuse et chorégraphe.Pour Faits d'hiver, Maëva présente le 23 janvier « Looking for Carlotta » une conférence dansée avec Carlotta Ikeda - une figure féminine du Butô - à laquelle elle a consacré 10 ans de recherche.Dans cet épisode, Maëva raconte le Butô, le parcours de Carlotta entre le Japon et la France, ses apports au champ chorégraphique.Ce temps fort Carlotta Ikeda s'accompagne également d'une exposition à l'Espace culturel Bertin Poirée, réalisée à partir du Fonds d'archive Carlotta disponible au CnD.On l'écoute avec joie,

Who wants to go on a Blind Date with George Harrison? Millions of girls for sure, but only Hayley Mills and the backpage of the Melody Maker accomplished the feat. Tune in for Twinkle (but not Little Star), Ken Dodd, Elvis, the CND and a little song that just might be "the first record to start with feedback". Support this podcast at the $6/month level on patreon to get extra content! Create your podcast today! #madeonzencastr

Join us for the last episode of Season 2, (Yes, there will be a Season 3!) as we talk with two couples from CND and dive into the often elusive four way connection they have found with each other. Well talk about their journey so far, and enjoy some quips and fun stories along the way!

Aujourd'hui, je reçois Boris Charmatz, danseur et chorégraphe aux 10 000 vies de danse, figure de la danse contemporaine.A la tête du Tanztheater Wuppertal depuis 2022, il y bâtit avec Terrain - sa compagnie - un projet qui mêle l'héritage de Pina Bausch à la nouvelle création.Il aime convoquer la danse dans des espaces urbains atypiques, la partager dans des formes participatives ; un art qu'il ne cesse de penser et d'expérimenter pour toujours mieux le réinventer.On le retrouve dans « Emmitouflé » au CND le 7 décembre.On l'écoute avec joie.

Join us in this One on One interview with Robert Ellsberg and author, Libby Osgood, as they discuss "Green Saints for a Green Generation".Get your copy today at https://maryknoll.link/b06171In Laudato Si' Pope Francis established care for creation as one of the central themes of Catholic social teaching. Yet that ecological consciousness has yet to take root en masse among the Catholic faithful. In Green Saints for a Green Generation young Catholic women on “saints”—canonized and not—who connected their faith to concern for the earth.   The writers include a wide range of figures, from the traditional, such as Sts. Clare of Assisi, Ignatius of Loyola, and Marguerite Bourgeoys, to contemporary figures like Thomas Merton, author Toni Morrison, and the Martyrs of the Amazon. By connecting these key figures to environmental responsibility, the contributors encourage the not-yet informed to become active, inviting younger generations to join the ecological movement, to take taking on the responsibility from their elders, and to shoulder the ecological burden for themselves.   Libby (Elizabeth) Osgood, CND, PhD, PEng, is co-editor with Kathleen Deignan of Teilhard de Chardin: A Book of Hours (Orbis, 2023). She is also an aerospace engineer who teaches sustainable design engineering at the University of Prince Edward Island, Canada. She is a religious sister of the Congregation of Notre Dame de Montreal.Order your copy: https://maryknoll.link/b06171

Guest: Melissa Anderson, AuD, CCC-A: This episode explores cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) and its consequences, focusing on using cochlear implants in this population. The guest provides expert insights into counseling and programming, as well as what collaborating on a team to manage these patients looks like.

Entrevistamos al coreógrafo y bailarín Nacho Duato sobre su nueva compañía de danza en Madrid, CND. Reflexiona acerca del mundo musical y del baile entre risas. Escuchar audio

CND is back with an all new episode as Will and Adam chat with their friend Tomer Azarly from Clutch Points about his time covering the Clippers in LV at Summer league, what young guy gets minutes, what really happened with Kawhi and Team USA, Russ being in Denver now and Paul George calling the Clippers the B team and more....

Shownotes and Transcript On this episode of Hearts of Oak Podcast, we sit down with Topher Field, a prominent Australian libertarian commentator and activist. Topher shares his experience navigating the challenging landscape of media and activism during the COVID-19 lockdowns in Melbourne. He discusses the charges he faced for advocating peaceful protests against government actions and the importance of freedom of speech in the face of oppressive measures. The interview delves into the impact of lockdowns on mental health and relationships, which fuelled Topher's increased activism. He provides a detailed account of the progression of protests in Melbourne, highlighting the power of grassroots movements in challenging authority. The conversation also touches on leaderless movements, accountability in COVID inquiries, and the need to resist oppressive policies. Throughout the episode, Topher encourages listeners to question authority, uphold morality, and resist unjust laws and critiques the worship of government and the compliance of churches with oppressive regulations, advocating for spiritual autonomy and the purity of faith-based practices. Over 15 years Topher Field has accumulated over 2 Million video views, over 150,000 regular followers, 14 film awards, 2 Libertarian awards, and released his first book in 2023. But his proudest achievement is without doubt his two criminal charges for ‘Incitement'. During the world famous Melbourne Lockdowns Topher was awarded these charges by Victoria Police for encouraging people to exercise their Human Rights during the Covid era in 2021. Topher is a renowned public speaker, interviewer, podcaster, writer, satirist, and champion of Human Rights. Good People Break Bad Laws: Civil Disobedience in the Modern Age in paperback and e-book from Amazon   amzn.eu/d/09MJazgR Watch award winning 'Battleground Melbourne'   battlegroundmelbourne.com Connect with Topher... WEBSITE          topherfield.net X/TWITTER       x.com/TopherField INSTAGRAM     instagram.com/topherfield Interview recorded  16.7.24 Connect with Hearts of Oak... X/TWITTER        x.com/HeartsofOakUK WEBSITE            heartsofoak.org/ PODCASTS        heartsofoak.podbean.com/ SOCIAL MEDIA  heartsofoak.org/connect/ SHOP                  heartsofoak.org/shop/ Transcript (Hearts of Oak) And I'm delighted to have someone from down under that I've seen the name quite a bit in my feeds over the last couple of years. It's always great to talk to someone that you've watched from afar, and that's Topher Field. Topher, thank you so much for your time today. (Topher Field) Well, Peter, what a pleasure, and thank you for having me. Not at all, it's great to have you on. And obviously, people can follow you @TopherField on Twitter, and TopherField.net is your website. And of course you're, I mean I've seen you on twitter quite a bit and whenever Sam Sobel connected us, and I thought I kind of recognized that name, because Topher is not a name that's very popular. So, you're thinking that definitely sticks out but you're probably one of Australia's leading, I think most recognized libertarian political commentators. And you've, it's it's your work in in the media and I know that's your background from when you were younger and now you've really made a name for yourself winning awards: libertarian awards. Also that documentary Battleground Melbourne setting. The madness that you faced there in Australia and author of Good People Break Bad Laws which is a fascinating topic. I know we'll delve into that a little bit and loved, I think on your website you said that your proudest moment, proudest achievement is getting those incitements, those punishments for standing up against the COVID lockdown. Not just punishments, criminal charges. They chased me with criminal charges and tried to lock me away for two and a half years for the crime of encouraging people to exercise their human right to engage in peaceful political protest at a time when our government was violating human rights. So yeah, that is honestly, that is my proudest achievement and, I hope never to have to repeat such a thing in my, in the future, but unfortunately you and I both know this fight is far from over. Oh, absolutely. Could I tell them, I mean, leading, leading up to that, what, you're also your, your background, I mean, you grew up with your dad being involved in media and your understanding a little bit about the business. Some of us have been thrown into this and we've either sunk or swell or swum, but you kind of had a little bit of an understanding. Can you tell us about your role in the media leading up to, I guess, the COVID tyranny. What had been your primary focus in terms of putting a message out up until, I guess, up until 2020? Well, I'm probably the world's only accidental political commentator. I was driving a forklift in a warehouse, quite enjoying myself, making good money. I enjoyed the manual labor, the repetition of it, and I could go home. And I was working on a fiction novel at the time and doing a bit of acting. And just enjoying sort of creative expression. And my cousin came into work one day. Yes, I'm the cliche forklift driving cousin working at the same place, kind of life, very blue collar. And my cousin comes into work and he says, Topher, you should audition for project next. And I said, what's that? It was a project being run by a very respected Australian journalist where he was recruiting and looking for the next generation of news producers, presenters, writers, researchers, these sorts of things. And in order to audition, you had to submit a video. So I went, okay, my dad taught me how to do videos. He was involved in community television. He was in professional radio and then in community television. And I cut my teeth from the earliest ages that I can remember. There was a camera in the house and I've been editing and doing audio and all that stuff. I learned the craft from him. So, I put that to good use and I made a video as an audition. And I was deliberately quite controversial, because I didn't want to find that I got into this show and then had my wings clipped and they were telling me what I could say or what I couldn't say. So I was deliberately pretty provocative and I didn't get in. Surprise, surprise. And so then I was left with this video that I had nothing. This is 2009. I didn't even have a YouTube channel. In fact, in Australia in 2009, most people didn't have internet fast enough to play YouTube videos in real time. You had to let them buffer for a few minutes. So, I started a brand new YouTube channel with zero subscribers. I uploaded the video and I sent it to my mom and she must've watched that video 30,000 times because shortly afterwards, was I had 30,000 views, which is pretty extraordinary for 2009 in Australia, doing a 12 minute long political exploration of water supply issues into my home city of Melbourne. Tell me how a video like that gets 30,000 views, even in today's market, let alone back then. So, then people began asking me to do more videos and I'm going, this is absurd. I'm a forklift driver. What do you think I am? I'm nothing. And eventually someone came to me with a video. I said no to everybody, and then someone came to me with a video that I couldn't say no to, and I said yes to that second video, and then I said yes to a third video and a fourth video, and it became a bit of a thing. My main focus has actually been water and water supply issues, particularly to irrigation farmers in what's called the Murray Darling Basin in Australia. So, 40% of Australia's food comes from this part of the world, and our government is destroying farmers by regulating and restricting access to irrigation water. So, that's really what I've spent most of my time talking about. But I did a series on climate change where I partnered with Lord Christopher Monckton in the UK, and I travelled to the US and Canada, interviewed a bunch of people. Professor Fred Singer, before he passed away, is one of my sort of proudest achievements to have had the chance to speak to him while he was alive. I've done work on freedom of speech. I've done work on over-regulation, over-taxation, cost of living, and a range of other sort of topics along the way. Basically always on the I'm a libertarian. So, I'm always coming from that libertarian perspective, but I'm also a Christian. So, bringing those two together and that's a pretty rare thing in Australia there really isn't a lot of a lot of people in that space in Australia and broadly on the conservative side of politics. Oh that's fascinating. Water management and freedom of speech. How do those fit together? So, I've had to ask myself the same question and the best answer I've got for you, Peter, and it's not necessarily a good answer, but it's the best one I've got, is that I struggle to walk past an injustice. Once I see something and go, that's wrong. That should not be the way it is. I find it very difficult to just ignore it and pretend I didn't see. And so water management, I kind of fell into because my very first video was about water supply into Melbourne city, which is a 4.4 and a half million person city that was on heavy water restrictions. There was a drought at the time and they were building a desalination plant and I've said the desalination plant was a bad idea and we should instead build a dam on there's a particular river where there was a dam reservation set aside by engineers 100 years ago, but politics being what it is today they were refusing to build a dam there for greeny sort of reasons. So, that's that was my very first video and then someone said well if you think that's bad have a look at what they're doing down irrigators up on the Murray River. And I investigated that and boy, boy, is that is that bad and people are literally being pushed to suicide and despair and bankruptcy and everything. And of course, it impacts food prices and has a knock-on effect to us all. So for me, that was kind of a fight that I couldn't walk past. But as a political commentator, freedom of speech is essential to my work. It's a non-negotiable, and it should be a non-negotiable for us all, but it's especially a non-negotiable when that's your stock in trade, is the right and the ability to say, government, you're wrong. You're doing the wrong thing. And so I was already defending, I was defending freedom of speech before it was cool. And then, of course, COVID came along and we saw censorship just escalate to an entirely new level. But those two have really been two of my biggest topics along the way. Tell us about during the COVID tyranny. I saw a level, and probably you did as well in Australia, a level of frustration boiling over that we haven't seen in a long time. We saw demonstrations against the Iraq war back in Tony Blair's time, a million people on the streets. Since then, we hadn't seen anything else. It was the pool tax rats and Margaret Thatcher's time, going back to that. And suddenly this happens and you've got huge, huge crowds coming out and active, I guess not civil obedience, but beginning to beginning to walk towards that line. I mean were you surprised that certainly in Britain people seem to be pushed and pushed and pushed and the the frustration boils out at the pub over a couple of drinks and that's the the level of it. Yeah. But something happened to push people how did you see that and view that because I wasn't in media at that point. We had just started two months before, but you saw this through a perspective of someone in the media. Tell us how you viewed that in your country. Our experience was very different in Melbourne as compared to anywhere else in Australia, let alone anywhere else in the world. So, for those that don't know, Melbourne became the most locked down city in the world and remains that to this day with the exception of China. China then did go on to do even more extreme things, but for a long time, Melbourne was the most locked down and outside of China continues to be the most locked down city in the world. We had de facto house arrest. You could not leave your house unless you were leaving for less than one hour and for an approved set of conditions. They shut down schools. They shut down all but essential workplaces. They shut down even kids' playgrounds and things. You could not so much as go to a beach and sit on the beach to watch a sunset. Even in your one hour of yard time, you would be arrested if you were found to have left the house just to go and enjoy some sunshine. So we had a curfew, an 8 p.m. curfew that was enforced very, very vigorously, very, very violently. We had what was called a ring of steel. This was a series of checkpoints that separated metropolitan Melbourne from the rest of rural Victoria. And they had military manning that checkpoint and demanding that you show paperwork to prove that you had a need to travel across that artificial new border that they'd put up around the city. And we had protests being treated as completely illegal. So, I spoke at the very first anti-lockdown protest, and this was my first ever conscious act of civil disobedience. It was the first time I walked out my door. I was 38 years old or so. I was a clean skin, ex-Army Reserve, ex-I'd done a bunch of charitable work. I was a clean skin. You look at my police record, It was better than spotless. It was positive. I'd handed in wallets that I'd found on the street and all sorts of stuff, right? And then all of a sudden, here I am walking out my door to go and deliberately speak at a rally that had been declared to be illegal. And that was really a turning point in my life and took me in a whole new direction, because I live streamed that event and such was the hunger. People were desperate, but no one was yet willing to make any moves. By the time I got home from that event, that live stream had been watched over 100,000 times. And this is just a live stream on Facebook. I had a Facebook page with maybe 10,000 people on it. So, that was a pretty big deal for me at the time. And people, you know, I had a wave of abuse pour into my inbox, into my emails and so forth. People angry how dare you. You're killing grandma all that sort of stuff. Then shortly on the back of that there was a wave of support: thank you for speaking out I've been thinking the same thing, but I thought I was going crazy, now I know I'm not. And then on the back of that was a wave of despair, people reaching out in emails and in messages into my inbox just needing to tell me their story, because by this point in time we were about we were about by then we're about eight weeks in to lockdowns, seven weeks into lockdowns. And for anyone who was already at the margins financially, was already close to the wind, this was absolutely decimating them. For anyone whose mental health was already borderline, this was destroying them. Anyone whose marriage was close to breaking up, this was the final straw. And I just had people pouring their hearts out to me. And at first, I thought, why are you talking to me? I can't help you. I've got nothing. I'm in the same position as you. I've got a kid, a pregnant wife. My business is going down the tube, because I had I had another business separate to the political commentary at the time. My life is as much of a mess as yours. Why are you asking me for help? And then I realized they weren't asking me for help. Not one of them asked me to help them. What they wanted was someone to listen. And this is the tragedy of what happened, Peter, is all of the people that were supposed to be there for them had turned their back. The church pastors, the mental health counsellors, most of the politicians, a lot of people's families had all turned their back on them to the point that they were digging up the contact details of a YouTube political commentator and pouring their heart out to me in emails and messages. Such was the isolation that they experienced. So in that context, you can understand that the protests remained very, very small for many, many months. We saw violent arrests where if someone was known to have been organizing protests, the police would show up at their door at six o'clock in the morning with a battering ram, smash their way through the door, violently tackle them to the ground, hospitalizing them in some cases. We saw extreme levels of violence that we're not used to in Australia. This is not the kind of place where these things happen. And so that kept our numbers really small, really down in the few hundreds. And myself and a number of other courageous people, we kept on getting out there and kept on doing it anyway, knowing the risks and getting attacked by riot squads and attacked by police on horses, and threats of arrest, and all sorts of things. And then the government made a tactical mistake. There was a woman by the name of Zoe Bueller, and she was out of town. She was outside of that ring of steel that I mentioned earlier. She lived in a rural town, and she said, hey, let's get together and do a protest at the local park during our one hour of yard time. Now, the thing with her was where she was, that was actually legal. But the police arrested her anyway. They went into her home and her husband live streamed, or she live streamed on her phone, her arrest. And that was her, you may be familiar with it, in her pyjamas. She's pregnant. There's a couple of kids in the home. And she's saying, being arrested for what? They were arresting her for incitement, the very same charge that they later charged me with. And that video went viral. And that really turned the movement from just a couple of hundred hardcore people doing what our conscience required us to do against all odds and all of a sudden we were getting a couple of thousand people. And then there was a year or so of that on and off increasing police violence ultimately leading to them shooting us with rubber bullets and then finally their conscience that they were shamed effectively, by us refusing to back down and their conscience got the better of them and the police finally said: hey we're not doing the violence anymore and then all of a sudden our numbers exploded into the hundreds of thousands it's. That accidental leadership which I think has been intriguing and probably is at the heart of what makes the establishment afraid, because when you look at all different demonstrations they kind of come from organizations that then push that agenda, that idea, and then arrange demonstrations, arrange rallies, arrange protests but this had; I mean the people that I'm sure it's same for you, that I've met, who've come from sports, from music, from different industry, from never done as you said a protest in their life suddenly come out. And it's been fascinating that accidental leadership that we have seen worldwide. Yeah, and you're absolutely right this is what makes them afraid. It's the hydra. And this is this really came out to me and I really bring this point out in battleground Melbourne the documentary which you can watch for free at battlegroundmelbourne.com The thing that I really wanted to bring out there was this isn't my story. I had the privilege of being the storyteller, but it's not actually my story. I didn't write that. That was written by the people of Melbourne, the people of Victoria, and the courage that they showed. And what we see time and again, the theme that I really sought to bring out in that documentary was we kept on being knocked down. And then without any structured leadership, there was no board of directors making decisions. People just got creative. And somehow the movement as a whole stood back up again. It might have been different people. It might've been in a different place and it might've been in a different form. But every time the government thought they'd finally knocked us down, we reappeared as a movement. We reappeared in some new form and we were continuously adapting our tactics and they were continuously adapting their tactics. And in the end, they got to the point where they couldn't escalate any further. And we still hadn't gone away. We still hadn't backed down. They literally got to the point where the only thing left for them to do was to start shooting with live ammunition. That was their last option. They had done everything else up to that point. Tear gas and riot police and mounted police and home invasions and rubber bullets onto, you know, shooting people in the back, unarmed people in the back with rubber bullets at the Shrine of Remembrance, a war memorial of all places. I mean, absolute disgrace. And then after doing that, thinking, oh, we finally got them. They're going to run away scared now. Well, then along came nurses and teachers who completely transformed the whole way the movement looked. They showed up in parks in their uniforms, wearing masks, socially distanced, with writing on their tops saying how long they'd been a teacher or how long they'd been a nurse and these sorts of things. And they just stood silently in the park. So, all of a sudden, now that they'd gone to the rubber bullets, et cetera, gone was the rabble rousing and the chanting and everything else. Now, all of a sudden, they're faced with a bunch of young women, mostly incredibly courageous, standing in parks, socially distanced, wearing masks and silent. And they show up with the rubber bullet guns and they show up with the riot police and they show up with the horses. And I think finally, it was like a mirror looking back at them. And suddenly they saw themselves and realized what they'd become. And it was shortly after that that they released, they leaked this letter to the public, which they'd sent to the premier saying, we're not doing this anymore. It's time to put away the tear gas. We're not doing the violence anymore. It's exactly what you're talking about. The way I paraphrase it is this. We were ordinary people who were faced with extraordinary times. All we did was make the decision to do what was right, even though it was our government that was wrong. That's it. That's it. That's all we are. Because there were enough of us and because we had the courage to keep coming back and to keep getting back up in spite of what we faced, in the end, we won. And that, I think, is a massive lesson and for all of humanity with everything that we're up against, because a leaderless, decentralized, organic movement is unstoppable for as long as we don't stop. It's up to us to just go, we're just going to keep going. A movement with leaders can be stopped if you take out the leaders, you know, strike the shepherd and the sheep will scatter. But what if there's no shepherd? What if the sheep have started to think for themselves? And that's what we created here in Melbourne. And I think that's a model. That's not to take anything away from people who do step into leadership, but I think that's a model for us. We become unstoppable if we adopt that model. And I want to pick up one of the two things we've learned. And I'm asking you that not just because it's a historical event that we can learn a lot from, but here in the UK, we right now have the COVID inquiry. I think in the next day or two, it's going to release its first findings. And the figures on the COVID inquiry here in the UK, it's thought it'll be the most expensive inquiry in British history. It's just going to be under just under 200 million pounds for the whole inquiry. I think I read something like cost of £130,000 or £140,000 a day. So, I'm asking you your experiences, because we are going through this charade of a COVID inquiry. Has there been, and of course, that's not going to lead to anything. But in Australia, have there been questions? We've seen a kind of slow change in the media on the right, but getting to say, actually, you know, we were always saying we shouldn't buy onto this. I said, uh-uh, no, you weren't. You had like an article every two months that might touch on another side. But what about you in terms of reckoning for the media, in terms of reckoning for politicians on what Australians were put through? Nowhere near enough. We've had a couple of really good politicians, particularly a couple of really good senators who have been relentlessly pursuing this. And they've had some small wins. But one of the things that is just a reality that we have to be willing to accept and push our way through is that the powers that be have a lot of layers of defence. So, they'll try and stop an inquiry from happening. And then once they can't stop the inquiry from happening, they try and rig the inquiry by, you know, rigging the terms of reference or rigging who the commissioner is or these sorts of things. We've just seen unfolding right now in Australia, we have a senator for the United Australia Party called Ralph Babbitt, Senator Ralph Babbitt, great guy. He managed to get a, I don't remember the technical term for it, but it's some form of inquiry and a bunch of people made submissions to that inquiry. And then the person running the inquiry has just announced they're not going to publish a lot of those submissions. They're taking them as almost like comments. Right. And they're not actually publishing them as part of the inquiry. It's like, well, no, you don't get to silence the Australian people like that. And so now Senator Babet is taking up that particular fight to try and make sure that this actually gets done properly, et cetera. So, they kind of have defence in depth, because there's a lot of tricks and tools that they get to use. And every single one of them is a new layer that we have to battle our way through. What I think though is is going to happen much faster than we've seen in history, so in history we saw for example the thalidomide debacle where for a very long time if you know thalidomide being dangerous was considered to be misinformation and you were uninformed and ignorant if you said that it was, or asbestos, and then all of a sudden everyone always knew that it was dangerous. Right? That was you know we saw that trend and we're watching that happen in some parts of the media now: oh, I've always said that we should be careful about an untested vaccine. No you didn't, you told everyone to go out and get jabbed, right? Yeah. So, we're seeing that revisionism is kicking in. But it took 40 years for thalidomide to finally get apologies and compensation and these sorts of things. But that happened before the internet. And that happened when we weren't as able to communicate with each other as what we are now and able to dig and discern the truth. The gatekeepers of old are no longer, they no longer hold the level of power that they used to have. And that allows us to accelerate the timelines. The other comment that I'll make, Peter, is people only start to pay attention to politics once it starts to hurt them. There's a thing called rational ignorance. It doesn't make sense. It's not rational for us to pay lots of attention to something that we can't really influence. Influence if we don't if we can't really control it well we should spend our time and focus you know invest that into the things that we can have more control over. So, there's a level of rational ignorance when it comes to politics. Why would I pay attention to politics when I can't really change anything anyway. And most Australians have that attitude until it hurts them and then all of a sudden they arc up. And then they can't understand why they can't get help from anyone else, well because it's not hurting them. So, the silver lining of something as tragic as what what we've seen during COVID, the silver lining is that it hurt a lot of people simultaneously. And a lot of people at the same time all stood up and said, hey, this isn't okay. I'm not happy with this. And then when they looked around for support, there were actually other people out there to support them because there was a lot of people standing up at the same time. And what's important now is that we maintain the rage, to use a tired old phrase. We cannot let up on this. We cannot let people take a revisionist view. Oh, we did the best we could with what we knew at the time. Any of that sort of, we cannot accept any of that. And we must just continue to relentlessly pursue justice and understand that this is a long-term project. We're not going to win this overnight. But what's happening now is we're getting organized at a level that we've never been before. And our pushback is getting sophisticated at a level that it never has been before. And more and more people are willing to take risks. And I'll use a local example to you, you, Peter. It would have been unimaginable in the 2000s for a situation to arise in a city like London where the ULEZ cameras would have been being vandalized on a widespread scale. That's unthinkable. The Blade Runner phenomenon, again, an example of a leaderless organic movement that just popped up where people used the internet and our ability to communicate with each other to find these cameras, to map them, to publish those maps. And then other people looked at those maps and made decisions about what they were going to do. I'm not condoning anything of course but observing what's happened that was unthinkable 20 years ago and now it's an ongoing phenomenon. So, I'm actually quite hopeful that a lot of these petty tyrants, these people who want to control and tell us how we're going to live, are going to find themselves bewildered by this array of pushback that seems to come out of nowhere. And they will go looking for the enemy and say, who's organized this? And the answer is no one. And that makes it really hard for them to stop. So, I'm actually really optimistic. And I think it was actually in the end, a good thing that COVID would hurt so many people and not good that they were hurt but it's good now that we live in a world where ordinary people are standing up in a way that we have not seen in my lifetime before. And that fits into your your book: Good People Break Bad Laws. Up until this point good people follow the law, good people call the police if there is a problem, good people vote for the the party that they think is best. Good people use the legal system for solutions to problems. And there's a whole list of what good people, and I always looked at CND, the anti-war people, or kind of stop oil people and thought that's so disruptive. How dare they do that? And now... Either maybe I was dumb, maybe I didn't get it before, maybe I trust the institutions. But I think a lot of people, certainly more on the right, trusted the institutions to a large degree. Now that trust has completely gone. That contract, I think, with the government has been completely broken. And we've gone from good people follow the law, even if it's not necessarily the best law, you do what you do as a citizen, to hell no. we're going to break. That's a huge change in society, in a democratic society. That's a massive change. Yeah, there's a number of layers to this. First and foremost, pretty much everybody on all sides of politics acknowledges that civil disobedience has been the right thing in various moments in history. One of the most obvious being, of course, the civil rights movement to end segregation in the US. That's sort of a pretty obvious contemporary example where we say, Martin Luther King and even many people, Malcolm X and a bunch of others, yes, that was the right thing for them to do. Civil disobedience, breaking those laws was a good thing for them to do. And when you look in a historical context, there's almost universal agreement about that. But there is certainly on the more conservative side of politics, a real discomfort about it in real time. And that's simply because conservatives have been used since the end of the Second World War to being the ones in charge, which means that when someone is disobeying, they're disobeying the conservatives, right? They're disobeying the establishment and the conservatives identify as that. They're disobeying us. What a bunch of rabble-rousing ratbags. Well, there's a right way to do it and there's a wrong way to do it. And just stop oil, et cetera. We see them doing it in very, very destructive ways. And my book does address that. I talk about the right way and the wrong way to do these sorts of things. But in principle, doing what's right is always right, even if the law is wrong, right? And we have to accept an uncomfortable truth for a lot of conservatives. And like I said, I'm a libertarian, so I have no issue with this, but a lot of conservatives struggle with this. When you change the law, you do not change what is right or wrong. What is right or wrong is already right or wrong. And when we change a law, we're either admitting that it used to be wrong and now it's right, or maybe that it used to be right and now we've got it wrong, or maybe that it was wrong both times. But we can't pretend that just because some people in a room stood around and approved the change of wording that we've changed the laws of nature and morality and what's right and wrong. We haven't. So, when we write laws, our task is not to define what's right and what's wrong. It is to discern what's right and what's wrong and to align the law as closely as possible to that. And that's a matter of conscience. And I have to do what's right according to my conscience, even if the people in that room have written laws that disagree with that particular point of view. And this is necessary. This is essential. People say: oh, we can't all just run around doing whatever we think is best. No, no, no. We all have to live our lives doing what we think is best. Because guess what? When I stand before God, I can't turn around and say: oh, but Peter made me do it. Peter told me it was the right thing to do. Nor can I say, oh, but a whole bunch of Peters in a house called parliament told me that it was the right thing to do. No, I don't get to outsource my morality. I'm accountable for my decisions, for the moral outcomes and the morality that is represented in the decisions that I make. And that's true, no matter what the law says. So what conservatives have to accept is that they are no longer in the majority. Okay. The cultural war has been lost. That's not to say that it's permanent. It's not permanently that way. But think about the sexual revolution and the aims of third wave feminism, the sexual revolution. They got everything they wanted, right? What we call conservative politics now is unrecognizable in the world of the 1950s. What we call conservative politics now is radical, progressive Marxist ideology. And we call that conservative now because we've completely lost track of how far we've slid. Conservatives have already lost the culture war. The culture war is over. Conservatives lost. What has happened now is that people who who believe in God. Who believe in family, who believe in what we would consider to be basic decency, basic morality, Judeo-Christian morals. We are now the revolutionaries. We are now the beatniks. We are now the hippies of our age. And we are the ones who are actually trying to bring about a revolution against an establishment that has rejected all of that morality. And we have to accept that that means that we need to adopt the tactics of the revolutionaries, the rebels. We're the cool kids now. That's the good news, Peter. We get to be the cool kids for a change rather than the stayed old, you know, the pearl clutches. The pearl clutches now are all on the left. Oh, you used the wrong pronouns. Oh, my heart, right? That's them now. We get to be the cool kids. And what that means is we have to accept and we have to move on from a lot of these old mindsets. And one of those mindsets was, oh, but it's the law. We all need to do what the law says. Well, that was always the wrong perspective. But not only now is it the wrong perspective, but it's also incredibly unhelpful. If the law is wrong, we have no obligation to obey and to do what's wrong. And in particular, I look at Psalm 94, I think it's verse 12, where it says that crooked leaders cannot be your friends. They use the law to cause suffering. And this is one of, I propose two tests for what a bad law is in my book, Good People Break Bad Laws. And one of them is a practical test, and one of them is a principles test. And the practical test is based on that verse in Psalm 94. Does this law cause suffering? Because that's the definition of a crooked ruler. A crooked ruler is someone who uses the law to cause suffering. And if the following or enforcing of a law causes more suffering than the breaking of that law would cause, then you are looking at a candidate for potentially a bad law. There's more to it than that. You have to read the book. But that becomes a candidate for this might be a bad law. And actually, my conscience might require me to disobey this law in order to do what's right. How, I will say I have not read the book, but I will be reading it. I'd encourage others because we are in different times and it's fascinating. And your comment about individual consciousness, individual responsibility, we seem to have contracted that out to a government that actually you're the ones that will decide what is good and what is bad, what's right and what's wrong. I no longer have to and we are in a completely different generation than previous generations in that there is no accountability. There's no right and wrong there's no accountability, and it's; yeah we have it we have to learn how to live as individuals within that new paradigm of actually people don't take personal responsibility for anything. And we'll see that in the COVID inquiry people say: oops. And what do you mean "oops"? How many people's lives were damaged? Destroyed? Kill? How many people were killed? This is not an oops and yet that seems to be where we are that there is zero personal responsibility for anything and certainly we see that in this in the States on obesity where actually you just take a drug, because that's just not nothing to your fault. And you just take a drug or it's your genes. No what about personal responsibility for lifestyle, but But that seems to have gone out the window completely. Peter, it's worse than that. So, I'm working on my second book, which will be out before the end of this year, which is titled Good Christians Break Bad Laws, Obeying God in a Fallen World. And it's specifically on the theology of civil disobedience. It looks at everyone from Dietrich Bonhoeffer and other sort of World War II heroes right back in history and then obviously diving deep into Scripture itself, Old Testament, New Testament, the words of Christ, et cetera, on this topic of obedience to government. Yes, I deal with Romans 13, 1 Peter 2. All of that is covered in this book. The reality of our situation, Peter, is that we actually now worship the government. And unfortunately, I have to include the church in that statement. What we saw during COVID, and I can't speak for where you are, but certainly where I am in the city of Melbourne, was almost every single church with a vanishingly small number of exceptions allowed the government to dictate to them whether or not they would open their doors,. Whether or not they would help the poor, whether or not they would gather and worship, whether or not they would take communion, how many people were allowed to sing etcetera. And and what they did was they turned around and said: oh no it's okay because we can we'll have a tiny skeleton crew in the building and we'll live stream church. You can do live stream church so this isn't a violation of our christian principles this isn't a violation of you know of the exhortation not to forsake the gathering together of the saints, because you can watch a video online. And of course when we look at the example: I'll just pull one example out, look at okay so we know that Daniel would pray multiple times a day he would open his window and he would. We pray in full public view. And when it was, I think, Nebuchadnezzar, I can always get mixed up between Darius and Nebuchadnezzar and all the others. I think it was Nebuchadnezzar was convinced by his secular advisors, his pagan advisors to make a law that said people could only pray to Nebuchadnezzar. Daniel didn't choose to keep praying in the privacy of his room and keep the door and the shutters closed. He could have done that. And he could have said, oh, well, I'm still practicing my religion. I'm just doing it in a way that's not going to provoke trouble. I don't want to cause any issues here. No, no, no. No, he opened those shutters and prayed in the same spot in full view because to go into hiding and say, oh, I'm still practicing my religion in secret is still saying to the government, you have the right to tell me that I can't do that. You're still conceding that ground to the government. And that means that you're giving the government more authority over your faith walk than God has. So, I believe that the church's biggest problem, and this is so funny because as a kid, you'd You'd read the Ten Commandments. You're like, oh, the idolatry one's out of date. Like, that doesn't apply anymore. Actually, I've realized, no, I'm completely wrong. Idolatry is the number one sin that we are facing in the church and in secular society here today. Specifically, we've made an idol with our own hands. Look at what the children of Israel did. They made calves with their own hands, and they fell down and worshipped them. When God designed government, God designed the system of judges. There was enough law that they could read it in three days, the whole thing. And they had a dispute resolution process. They could go to a judge to have a dispute be resolved. There was no other law and there was no other mechanism to make more law. And during the time of Isaiah, the children of Israel decided that that wasn't enough and they wanted a king. And they went to Isaiah and they demanded, oh, Samuel, was it? Excuse me, in the time of Samuel, I think it was. They demanded a king and they ended up getting Saul. When they went to Samuel and said to give us a king, Samuel was upset because he's being rejected as a judge and his children who are ungodly were being rejected as judges. And he takes it to God and God says to him, listen to what they're actually saying. They're not rejecting you. They're rejecting me as their king. And I'll cover all of this in the book, Good Christians Break Bad Laws. As their forefathers did in the wilderness, building golden calves and worshipping them. That's what God says in response. They are rejecting me as their king, as their forefathers did, building golden calves and worshipping them. God immediately equates creating a government that is beyond what God designed with idolatry. He immediately says, this is like worshipping a golden calf. And that's exactly where we are today. Look at the names of God in the Old Testament. Jehovah Jireh, my provider. Who do we look to for provision now? You know, the very Jehovah Nissi, Jehovah Tzidkenud, all the different names of God. They all have different meanings. My healer, my giver of wisdom, my protector, my refuge, my provider, et cetera. We look to the government for each and every one of those things now. We've literally worshipped government and allowed government to usurp God in every single part of our lives. And if it wasn't already obvious enough, it became glaringly obvious during COVID. And I think one of the most urgent needs in the world today is for Christians to get on our knees before God and repent of idolatry and worshipping government and obeying government, even where the government is the one causing misery. Even where the government has become crooked, like what Psalm 94 talks about. We've obeyed government instead of God. And the most urgent thing now is repentance in the church. I wasn't expecting us to go down this angle, but I'm enjoying this. You mentioned about not forsaking Hebrews 10, 25. It said, not giving up meeting together as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another and all the more as you see the day approaching. And how much closer are we to that day 2,000 years later? And there's no opt-out. The Bible is full of laws, of ideals, of examples, of guidelines for us to live by because God knows best because God made us, and therefore he's the one that knows the best way to live. There are no opt-outs. And certainly I remember being in one church, Church of England Church, and they said, oh, we need to wait until the government announce their guidelines later this week to know if we can meet and sing in the park this weekend. I think, well, we've already been told not to forsake gathering. What's wrong with meeting out in the open? I mean, Jesus didn't stop going and speaking in synagogues because people had leprosy. Actually, no, he went there. And there were so few. I think in the UK, I don't know of any church that actually, there was one church that had a legal fight, but they still shut the doors. I know I went to a big event with a Pentecostal preacher, Rodney Howard Brown. He was the only person, I mean, the first pastor in America. And it was interesting that the more traditional evangelical part of the church said, we need to be good citizens, and that means doing what we're told to do. Then you have the more Pentecostal or charismatic said, no, no, no, the Bible says this, so we do this. I was interested in seeing that division. But certainly, I've seen hook, line, and sinker that churches across the UK accepted everything the government told us to do. And you're saying you saw exactly the same in Australia. And there's been no change of that. There's been no apology. As you said no repentance for saying we got it wrong but if this happens again we will follow god's law not man's law yeah this Is such a crucial thing, it's such a tragedy that I actually know the names globally of most of the pastors that really did stand up. John MacArthur in the U.S and I think he was in California. Arthur Polowski a Polish immigrant to Canada. Bishop Marmari in Sydney who actually since got stabbed. He survived and thankfully he's okay, but he was one of the correct, he was a Coptic, I think, no offense if I get this wrong, Bishop, but I believe he's a Coptic or an Orthodox Christian and was really speaking up. There was a Catholic church in Jindera that was really good in a remote Australian outback sort of town. But these are the exceptions, right? I shouldn't be able to name the ones that stood up and did the right thing. When I challenged my own pastor on this, he said, Topher, I can't do what you want me to do, because the government will take away our funding for the soccer academy that we run for the migrants. Right? Now, I, I've read my Bible from cover to cover in a couple of different translations. And I, I just, I've tried, but I can't remember the verse that says, go ye into all the world and run soccer academies. I've, I'm going to have to go back and just study again and just try and find that verse because what's happened now. I mean, there's a reason why Jesus specifically warned, warned us and said, you cannot serve God and mammon. Why did he pick mammon? You can't serve God and sex. You can't serve God and bar. You can't serve, you know, God and your belly. Why did he pick mammon as the thing? Well, because that's going to be the key core temptation. And this is what we see, particularly in the established churches, because the business of church and the property and the building and the maintenance and the tithes and everything else is such an important thing. Governments have been very clever. They turned around a hundred odd years ago and said, oh, instead of you being excluded from the tax code entirely, let's give you a special charitable tax exempt status that brings you into the tax code. And then you'll be eligible for government funding for programs, for charitable stuff, right? We're doing it to help you. We're going to give you money and you can do more ministry, right? And luring churches with money into compromising and contracting with government and becoming just another civil, just another corporation, really, that just has a few special perks. Fast forward a hundred years and we get to a situation where pastors aren't willing to speak on transgenderism or abortion. Oh no, I better not talk about anything political. Oh no, I better not stand up for our right to actually worship God during a pandemic. I better not do those thing, because I'm going to lose these special privileges that the government has given me. Well, excuse me, who's your provider? What does the Bible say about that? And this is why I say, and I've ruffled a lot of feathers. I've got a lot of people's noses out of joint because I speak at the church and state conferences in Australia and elsewhere. And I challenge pastors and I challenge church guys. I'm not trying to cause damage to the church, but please hear me out. If your pastor compromised during COVID and has not repented, all right, I'm all about forgiveness, all about second chances. Is if your pastor made mistakes and then went, guys, I got that wrong. I'm so sorry. This is what I've learned. This is what I'm going to put in place to make sure I never do that again. Great. Great. All for it. But if your pastor still insists that shutting down was the right thing to do and turning away people who were in desperate need of help was the right thing to do right at a time when people needed the church the most. I mean, if your instinctive reaction when there is a threat to people's temporal lives is to lock the doors of the house that has eternal salvation, if that's your instinctive reaction, then you don't understand what it is that you do as a Christian pastor. You hold the keys to eternal life. When there is a temporal threat, when there is a pandemic, if it's the Black Death, for goodness sake, you should be throwing the doors of the church open, wheeling the speakers out onto the steps, cranking that thing up as loud as you can and saying: come one, come all, repent for your day of judgment could very well be at hand. And if you get word from the government, there's a pandemic coming and and your reaction is to shut your doors and turn people away, I put it to you that you are probably in the wrong profession. A hundred percent. We have pastors who want to be liked more than they want to do the right thing. And I'm a grew up pastor's kid. I've been involved in huge churches. And when you get to see behind the scenes, it is a desire to be liked and to do what you think the government. But it's this issue of which I think is the key issue and it's an issue that we will face here in the UK in the next five years. It's the tax exempt status. It's the charitable status, it is the money in the UK you get tax back. So, if you're a taxpayer, you give your 100 pounds to the church and then the church gets an extra 20 back. And most churches survive on that and if that was taken away they couldn't survive and this is why I've been at churches and pastors have have apologized for suggesting that abortion may be murder. They've apologized for saying that actually transgenderism may be wrong. I had a pastor who told me the way he combats the attack on sexuality is he has a bookmark in his Bible with man and woman in it. And that bookmark means that he is speaking truth. And of course, in the COVID, that's time and time again. And I can see, certainly in the UK with the Labour government, which we have a uni party, of course, it's no different than the Tory Labour Party. This is not on one side. It's the same thing. But I can see churches being told, unless you sign up to these pledges, the good citizen pledges, then you will lose your charitable status. And 99% of churches will happily sign up for the money. So you're 100% right. And this is the tragedy. So in Australia, we had a referendum recently around whether the government should redefine marriage to include same-sex couples, all right? And a lot of Christians, because the result was, yes, we should redefine marriage to include same-sex couples. And a lot of Christians said, oh, no, we lost the marriage debate. I say, well, no, no, no, hold on. We lost the marriage debate back in the 1950s when federal legislation was passed to create a federal marriage certificate. Because before then, you got a marriage certificate from your church. The government had nothing to do with marriage. And then in the 1990s, maybe early 2000s, then Prime Minister John Howard introduced legislation to introduce into the wording of the Marriage Act, man and woman. Because it didn't actually have it. It was assumed in the 1950s. They didn't have to define that in the 1950s. And then the church in the 1990s is like, yes, yes, yes, we've won. No, no. What we've said, what we've done is we've taken a sacred institution, marriage, and we've put it under a secular governance now. We've said this thing that God created can now be defined and redefined by government. I don't care whether you like the government's definition right now or not, the minute you concede to them the power to have a definition, then you've lost. And sure enough, 30 years later, there was a referendum and the definition was changed and all these Christians are like, oh no, we've lost the marriage debate. No, you lost that in the 1950s. We need to stop taking things that are sacred and putting them into the hands of secular governments. That is idolatry. We are worshipping government and it has to stop. Have you always been, I mean, from the beginning focused on the church being engaged and involved in society, because I think a lot of people have seen the collapse of the church during Covid, but then you go back further and you see at separate points in history of each of our countries you see the capitulation of the church to state mandates in varying degrees. But I've, it's you kind of, we've seen it very starkly with, we all thought, we all believed, actually, the state will not stop churches meeting. That'll be the last, you know, they may come in on what we believe on doctrine issues, on the culture wars, but actually, we'll still be allowed to meet on Sunday, so it's all good. And suddenly, that key right for Christians to gather together, share fellowship together, that's now taken away. Has that been partially the the last straw in people's engagements. I mean, how have you seen it in your involvement along that journey? Yeah, I'm going to answer something else before I answer your actual question. Let's stop and think for a moment what a low bar that is to set. Oh, at least the church allows us to meet. Well, the church in China is allowed to meet, right? You can be a Christian in the UK and in Australia and in Canada in exactly the same way that you can be a Christian in China. Just don't say the things that the government says you can't say. Your doctrine just has to to be the government approved doctrine. And then you can be a Christian. You can show up to church, you can wear a cross, you can call yourself a pastor, as long as you only preach the things that the government has approved. Look at how low we've already set the bar and what a terrible compromise that is. To your question, I was raised as a, I'm a pastor's kid. I'm actually, I'm a pastor's grandkid on both my mom and my dad's side. Both of them were pastors. My dad was a pastor, was raised in the church, of course, went through my phase of rebellion and trying to figure out what I actually believe, blah, blah, blah. And then I tried to prove that God didn't exist and I failed miserably. So, I've had to accept that he actually is real. And that the best thing I can do with my life is to pursue him. And as imperfect as I am and as flawed as I am and as a million different ways that I stumble, that's my life mission now. But I considered myself a political commentator. And then over time, I began to realize you can't, there's so many problems in politics that you can't fix without reference to faith, without reference to the underlying values, that inform political policy. So, I started to call myself a political commentator who's a Christian or, you know, a Christian political commentator. And I'm starting to realize, actually, I just need to drop the word political. And I think I'm actually, I actually just need to say, no, I'm a Christian commentator. And because that faith, what you believe about God informs what you believe about everything else. It involves culture. It involves politics. It involves commerce and employment and healthcare and anything you might want to commentate on is downstream of your belief in God. And so all I am is a guy to drive forklifts, who made a video, who somehow people found my work and said, hey, you keep talking. And now as I've pursued that, I've come to realize the most important thing that I can talk about, the most valuable thing that I can be talking about is faith and God and how best we live in a fallen world. And that's essentially the mission that I've set out to do. So that's why Good People Break Bad Laws is my first book is becoming Good Christians Break Bad Laws as my second book is the realization that I have to talk about the faith side of this, not to the exclusion of the politics. The politics does matter. The culture stuff does matter. But it's all informed by what you believe about God. And that's ultimately where the truth lies. And that's what we need to be talking about. Last question is in terms of you kind of don't think of Australia as being a out-and-out Christian country. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Never been down under, so I could be 100% wrong. But are we moving towards a church that is that is underground, a church that actually needs to separate itself from the state in a way that we haven't seen? I mean we have a we have a state church in the UK: church of England. And that's meant that the state have had 100 control and we now have 24 bishops in the lords that are wetter than any pathetic liberal you'll come across and are more concerned about environmental issues and plastic bags than they are actually about God and his position in society. Do you think in Australia you're moving towards actually the church will have to be underground and fairly separate? I think we were headed that way, but I think God is on the move. And I'm going to shamelessly name drop for a moment. Tucker Carlson was in Melbourne recently, and he met with me backstage. My wife and I chatted with him for about 25 minutes. Lovely, gracious man. I was very generous with his time. And we talked mostly about God. That was the number one thing that he and I, that we discussed. And he commented on how dark Melbourne felt spiritually compared to the rest of Australia. And he's absolutely right. Melbourne is a broken city, and there's a spiritual oppression, a spiritual aspect to it. But he also said, do you feel like God's doing something? I said, yes, thank you. We're not the only ones. And all over the place, I'm seeing what gives me huge encouragement is all over the place, including in my own personal faith walk, I'm seeing God calling people to prayer in a new and a fresh and a more powerful way than has been the case since probably the charismatic renewal. And prayer almost always precedes revival. Find me a revival that didn't have an enormous amount of prayer invested into it before it happened. I don't think there is one. And I believe that we're in a phase now where God is calling people to prayer and faithful people, the genuine Christians, the ones who aren't compromising, are coming to prayer. And yes, a lot of the church is falling into apostasy. A lot of the church is walking away from the basic fundamental tenets of the Christian faith and becoming more concerned about social justice and all this sort of stuff. And there will be a split. There will be a bifurcation. But I actually think there's going to be an enormous renewal and an enormous number of people who are just seeking the truth, seeking meaning, recognizing the meaninglessness of third wave feminism, culture war and politics and so much of this stuff, sport, money, all the rest of it. The meaninglessness is becoming really clear for a lot of people now. I think we're actually about to see an enormous revival where an enormous number of people are going to have a come to Jesus moment in the most real and literal sense. Yeah, 100%. I agree with you. And when it gets dark, it's time for the light of Christ to shine brightly. So, we are in that moment, certainly. Topher, really appreciate you coming on all the way over from down under. Thank you so much for your time, sharing a little bit about your story and fascinating how you see the church getting engaged, involved, and where that... Your book, you can obviously get as an e-book, you can get as a paperback. It's available here in the UK. As it will be down under. I'm sure it's available in the US. And Battleground Melbourne, what's the website again? So, the website for the book is goodpeoplebreakbadlaws.com. You can order it from Australia along with shirts and hoodies and things like that. Or you can go to Amazon and get it, and it'll just get printed in your local market, and you'll receive it that way. Or you can get an e-book, like you said. You can go to battlegroundmelbourne.com. Now, Battleground Melbourne is my multi-award winning documentary. It's an hour and 40 minutes long. It's a feature-length documentary. It's very high quality. It's won 14 awards around the world, and it tells the story of what happened in Melbourne at the most locked down city in the world. You can watch it for free. I don't need your money I don't even need your email address. Just go to battlegroundmelbourne.com. It's there. You can watch it. I highly recommend everyone do that. You will be shocked. Even people that lived through it in Melbourne but didn't step outside of their homes, they just did what they were told, they watch it and they're shocked at what happened on the streets of their own city on the other side of that door. And for people in London or around the world, the US, etcetera, I think it's worth seeing because this isn't unique to Australia. This is something that our governments all over the world, including in the US, would have loved to have done if they thought they could get away with it. And it's up to us to make sure that they know that they can't. 100 percent. Topher, thank you for joining us. And all the links for those are in the description. However, you're watching or listening to the podcasting apps. It will be all there in description, just click on and you can get the book, you can watch the film and everything is there. So don't for thanks for your time. Such a pleasure Peter. Thank you.

CnD with Adam Auslund who figured out his audio issues after a CnD Live after summer league game 1 and picked himself up to do another after Game 2 after the Clippers 87-78 win over Brooklyn. We'll talk Jordan Miller, Kobe Brown, Ray J, Cam Christie and more..

Ileana Cabra con su 'Nacarile', un recorrido por PhotoEspaña, Muriel Romero es la nueva directora de la CND y Martín Llade con Bedrich Smetana.Escuchar audio

Nearly 75 years after the United Nations called for the abolition of  coca leaf chewing, the world will have an opportunity to correct this grave historic error. The World Health Organization (WHO), at  the Plurinational State of Bolivia's request,  and supported by Colombia, will conduct a ‘critical review' of the coca leaf over the next year. Based on its findings, the WHO may recommend changes in coca's classification under the UN drug control treaties. The WHO recommendations would be submitted for approval by the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), with voting likely in 2026.  The Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) and the Transnational Institute (TNI) will be monitoring the coca review process closely and examining key aspects of the debate. As part of this we are producing a series called “Coca Chronicles”. The first issue of the Coca Chronicles discussed the current classification of the coca leaf in Schedule I of the 1961 UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (or its effective ban) and Bolivia's initiation of the WHO critical review process. The second issue highlighted three developments during the March 2024 CND session: (1) support for the coca review from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights; (2) Bolivia's call to protect the coca leaf as a genetic resource; and (3) an update on the WHO's preparations for the review.  In this third issue, Anthropologist Wade Davis gives us a deep dive into the history and significance of the coca leaf in the Andean Amazon region.  Wade Davis is a Canadian cultural anthropologist, ethnobotanist, photographer, and writer. He is professor of anthropology and the BC Leadership Chair in Cultures and Ecosystems at Risk at the University of British Columbia. He is a multiple award-winning author of more than 25 books, and has done extensive research into coca leaf, among many other ethnobotanic explorations.  

In episode 33 of The Cult Next Door Podcast, "When Religion Hurts You: with Dr. Laura E. Anderson", hosts Mattie and Ashleigh welcome first time guest Dr. Laura Anderson to the CND conversation. Dr. Anderson is a psychotherapist, trauma resolution and recovery coach, educator, and creator who specializes in complex trauma with a focus on domestic violence, sexualized violence and religious trauma. She is the founder and director of the Center for Trauma Resolution and Recovery, an online coaching company where she and the other practitioners work with clients who have experienced high demand/high control religions, adverse religious experiences, cults, and religious trauma. And, she is co-founder of the Religious Trauma Institute and the author of the book When Religion Hurts You: Healing from Religious Trauma and the Impact of High Control Religion, a book we cannot recommend enough!In this episode, Dr. Anderson shares her own story of growing up in fundamentalism and what eventually led to her exit. We discuss high control religion, Adverse Religious Experiences, and the impact trauma has on the nervous system. Dr. Anderson also gives listeners some tips on ways to regulate the nervous system and begin to heal.  Resources: You can find Dr. Anderson on Instagram @drlauraanderson where she provides daily content offering wisdom and encouragement for those healing from religious trauma. You can also schedule an appointment with a counselor who specializes in high demand/high control religions, adverse religious experiences, cults, and religious trauma through the Center for Trauma Resolution and Recovery:https://www.traumaresolutionandrecovery.com/Listen to Dr. Anderson's podcast, Sunday School Dropouts on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen to podcasts.For more information about the Religious Trauma Institute, check out the website. https://www.religioustraumainstitute.com/

Earlier this season on episode number 088 titled “the Skinny on Skin” we learned about the various skin disorders that can manifest in people with Parkinson's. Well, on the flip side, the skin is the largest organ in our body. It must hold all kinds of secrets to our health.  It turns out alpha-synuclein gets deposited in the skin of patients with synucleinopathies, which includes Parkinson's and related diseases. Therefore, a skin biopsy can be used to diagnose and confirm these diseases. Not only can this advancement in the diagnosis important, the skin biopsy can also be used to speed up clinical trials. The company leading the way with this procedure and process, CND Life Sciences, has only just getting started. They continue to investigate what the skin can provide clinicians and researches to help bring new therapies to market quicker. The director of medical affairs for CND and a person with Parkinson's explains how this all works. Listen on… https://cndlifesciences.com/ https://www.dbsandme.com/en.html  

This week, my guest on the Book Club podcast is the poet Jackie Kay, whose magnificent new book May Day combines elegy and celebration. She tells me about her adoptive parents – a communist trade unionist and a leading figure in CND – and growing up in a household where teenage rebellion could mean going to church. We also discuss her beginnings as a poet, her debt to Robbie Burns and Angela Davis and how grief itself can be a form of protest. 

This week, my guest on the Book Club podcast is the poet Jackie Kay, whose magnificent new book May Day combines elegy and celebration. She tells me about her adoptive parents – a communist trade unionist and a leading figure in CND – and growing up in a household where teenage rebellion could mean going to church. We also discuss her beginnings as a poet, her debt to Robbie Burns and Angela Davis and how grief itself can be a form of protest. 

Shawna, Misty, Nick and Alyssa, jump into a relatable conversation on Chemical hazards in the salon, basic chemical understanding, SDS, record keeping, permanent disfigurement, nerve damage, horror headlines from chemical burns in salons,  million dollar lawsuits, the importance of reading labels, chemical recycle centers and so much more in this weeks' discussion of I'd rather be safe than be sorry!!!

Kevin delivers a thunderous 3 minutes of remarks on behalf of SAM & FDPS to the UN's 67th CND, before all the member states to tremendous applause. Listen as he reminds member states of their treaty obligations to reject drug legalization & outlines the failures of extreme policies in Oregon, Canada, and more.Follow the work of SAM and FDPS below:https://learnaboutsam.org/https://gooddrugpolicy.org/https://thedrugreport.org/On X: https://twitter.com/learnaboutsamhttps://twitter.com/GoodDrugPolicyhttps://twitter.com/KevinSabethttps://twitter.com/LukeNiforatosOn Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/learnaboutsam

The Clippers have just 2 games left on the Grammy Road Trip and Adam and Will bring you a YouTube Live to talk about that and Kawhi sending a message to the team postgame after Detroit + how Amir has been a star in his role, Russ getting to 25k, Zu on his way back and more on the latest eipisode of CnD!

Are you a nail tech? If so we can help you RIGHT NOW! All you have to do is visit www.clawgasmic.com and join our free mailing list! for daily tips, tricks and motivation!Today we talk to the wonderful Layla from @beautyboss_businessacademy! She is phenomenal... need some inspiration? Here she is!She has kindly given our listeners a FREE 7-day trial to her membership, just use the code: CLAWGASMIC when you sign upSIGN UP HERE https://www.beautybusinessacademy.co.uk/members-clubFollow Layla on social mediaInstagram @beautyboss_businessacademyTo contact Chan for ad enquiries chan@clawgasmic.comfollow us on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/clawgasmic/subscribe to our YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/clawgasmicJoin our family www.clawgasmic.comMusic: Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!):https://uppbeat.io/t/ra/energizerLicense code: B7SMOYOU92ORL3Z3

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed on 10th December 1948, is seen by many to be a milestone document in human history. Drafted in the aftermath of the Second World War, it set out basic rights that belong to all of us regardless of race, religion, gender or politics. But has the declaration withstood the test of time? Roy Jenkins examines the issues with four people who have dedicated their working lives to fighting for human rights. Professor Sir Malcolm Evans, Principal of Regent's Park College in Oxford and former Chair of the United Nations Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture. Canon Paul Oestreicher, an Anglican priest and a Quaker, a CND vice-president and former Chair of Amnesty International UK. Yasmine Ahmed, UK Director of Human Rights Watch and Marissa Conway CEO of the United Nations Association in the UK.

Llega a los cines el 'Robot dreams' de Pablo Berger, Agustín Gómez Arcos en Español gracias a Cabaret Voltaire, doble de danza con el CND y el Ballet Nacional. Nos vamos con Martín Llade y las canciones de Napoléon que no encontramos en la película.Escuchar audio

We continue our conversations with real couples of CND at the 2023 WhiteChocolate Total Hotel Takeover for part 2! Guests: RPLUSC4EVER

In November of 1957, a small committee was formed. February 17, 1958, they held the first public meeting of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. That same year, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament asked the artist Gerald Holtom to create a symbol for the movement. The CND has been at the forefront of the peace movement in the UK and claims to be Europe's biggest single-issue peace campaign. Holtom's design though has become one of the most widely recognized symbols on the planet. I am talking of course of the peace sign.  More than one peace sign exists. There is a hand gesture comprised of a thumb holding down the ring finger and pinky as the index and middle fingers are splayed to form a “v” In some bit of irony, that hand gesture started on the battlefields of World War II. Allied soldiers held up the gesture signaling “v for victory” and sometime later, anti-war protesters adopted the gesture as a peace sign.  The universal symbol developed by Gerald Holtom though, is the other peace sign, the one consisting of a circle with a vertical line down the center and two diagonal lines forming an inverted v shape going from the center of the vertical line down to the bottom portion of the circle. Gerald Holtom made line drawings representing the flag semaphores of N and D for nuclear disarmament then put it into a circle to represent the globe and because let's face it, the roundness looks nice. Check out my other podcast Art Smart | Rainbow Putty Science Lab Who ARTed is an Airwave Media Podcast. If you are interested in advertising on this or any other Airwave Media show, email: advertising@airwavemedia.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What does acting have to do with the Incarnation? Sister Violaine Paradis explains!  Read the transcript here: https://anunslife.org/podcasts/random-nun-clips/RNC-igf062-paradis-grace-on-stage Listen to the full episode of In Good Faith podcast here: https://anunslife.org/podcasts/in-good-faith/igf062-violaine-paradis Don't forget to call us and leave a message. Tell us what you like, ask a question, or just say hi. Call 913-214-6087. Let us know your thoughts about the podcast by taking this short survey! Your input helps us shape the future of the In Good Faith podcast! Click HERE to take the survey. Thank you!

Visitation is at the heart of the spirituality of the Congregation de Notre Dame. Sister Violaine Paradis explains why. Read the transcript here: https://anunslife.org/podcasts/random-nun-clips/RNC-igf062-paradis-mary-visitation Listen to the full episode of In Good Faith podcast here: https://anunslife.org/podcasts/in-good-faith/igf062-violaine-paradis Don't forget to call us and leave a message. Tell us what you like, ask a question, or just say hi. Call 913-214-6087. Let us know your thoughts about the podcast by taking this short survey! Your input helps us shape the future of the In Good Faith podcast! Click HERE to take the survey. Thank you!

When Violaine Paradis couldn't decide what to do with her life, prayer, silence, and a comic book led her to a place where she could feel God's love.  Read the transcript here: https://anunslife.org/podcasts/random-nun-clips/RNC-igf062-paradis-felt-love-of-god  Listen to the full episode of In Good Faith podcast here: https://anunslife.org/podcasts/in-good-faith/igf062-violaine-paradis Don't forget to call us and leave a message. Tell us what you like, ask a question, or just say hi. Call 913-214-6087. Let us know your thoughts about the podcast by taking this short survey! Your input helps us shape the future of the In Good Faith podcast! Click HERE to take the survey. Thank you!

Sister Violaine Paradis, CND  worked as an actress before experiencing a return to God that made her leave everything to enter the Congrégation de Notre-Dame novitiate in August 2009. After her first vows, she pursued studies in pastoral theology and, later, embarked on an integral training centered on human development at the Institut de Formation Humaine et Intégrale de Montréal. In 2017, her Congregation invited her to live a one-year mission and immersion experience in Honduras in one of the CND communities present in the field. For three years, Sister Violaine has been working as a social pastoral worker in the Centre-Sud and Hochelaga-Maisonneuve neighborhoods in Montreal. (1:43) O Canada! (6:20) A vocation growing in a non-religious family (8:30) Planting seeds of faith (17:27) A petite Mother Teresa (23:40) The acting bug (27:33) The truth about acting (30:05) A different perspective on incarnation (39:34) Acrobatics (45:17) Troupe-ing around the world (52:29) Listening for the inner voice (1:00:08) Decided (1:02:49) Visitation (1:13:25) World Youth Day   Congrégation de Notre-Dame: https://www1.cnd-m.org/en/   Read the transcript here. https://anunslife.org/podcasts/in-good-faith/igf062-violaine-paradis   Subscribe to our newsletter  https://siste.rs/3isP2CZ Check out lots more podcasts  https://siste.rs/2SfnoyS Let us know your thoughts about the podcast! Please take this short survey—your input helps us shape the future In Good Faith podcasts. Click HERE to take the survey.  Thank you! Don't forget to call us and leave a message. Tell us what you like, ask a question, or just say hi. Call 913-214-6087.

Aujourd'hui, je reçois Mathilde Monnier, danseuse, chorégraphe et pédagogue. Après plus de 40 créations, elle présente Blacks Lights au festival d'Avignon, une pièce qui dénonce par les corps et les mots les violences faites aux femmes. Figure de la danse contemporaine, elle a également été directrice du Centre chorégraphique de Montpellier pendant 20 ans et directrice du Centre national de la danse (Cnd). On l'écoute avec joie. Cet épisode a été enregistré pendant la 77e édition du festival d'Avignon au Cloître des Carmes, avec l'écho du chant des cigales.

The whole CND crew is BACK! Will, Adam, and Chuck talk Kawhi's extension situation, Russ and Plum being back, what KJ Martin brings to the team, and the Clippers Summer League team performance up to this point

It's time for another recap of cybersecurity news, a 60-second explanation of security concepts benefitting a charity, and plenty of banter between SURGe's Mick Baccio, Ryan Kovar, and Audra Streetman! You can watch the episode livestream here.  The team from Splunk discussed the latest security news, including: - What the Russia-Ukraine conflict means for network defenders with information from CISA and others - CISA's new online resource hub for free tools - Major chat channel outage causes issues around the world 60 second charity challenge: - Mick and Ryan discuss communications and how to deal with outages Deep Dive: - Mick and Ryan explain the 4 Cs of cyber: CNO, CNE, CNA, and CND.

Gerald Holtom's CND symbol, known internationally as the ‘peace' symbol, made its debut at a protest march by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament on 4th April, 1958.  The march went from London to Aldermaston, where Britain's nuclear weapons were and still are manufactured. Five hundred cardboard ‘lollipop sticks' displaying the logo were produced - and it's since scarcely been out of circulation as an anti-establishment plea for peace around the world. In this episode, Arion, Rebecca and Olly question whether Goya helped influence Holton's iconic design; reveal how author J.B. Priestley had fermented the protests on this day; and consider the International Shoe Corporation's dubious claim to the patent …  Further Reading: • ‘The Peace Symbol: Beginnings and Evolution' (ThoughtCo, 2019): https://www.thoughtco.com/the-peace-symbol-1779351# • ‘He gave his unforgettable work for nothing. Shouldn't the designer of the peace symbol be commemorated?' (The Guardian, 2015): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/28/shouldnt-british-designer-gerard-holtom-of-peace-symbol-be-commemorated-paris-attacks • ‘Walter Wolfgang: 'why I marched to Aldermaston in 1958' (CND, 2018): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLqBUws7R8E #50s #UK #War #Design Love the show? Join 

It's time to polish off the banners, put on your green army jacket and CND badge, march to the doors of parliament and declare your allegiance to the sober revolution. Yes comrades, today we want to cause a riot and find out why sobriety is having a social mutiny.Yes, today Vic and Hamish and going to find out why sobriety is trending and dig into the reasons more people are deciding to give up on grog. Is it due to the pandemic? Does social media play a part? or are people just more aware of their own health nowadays?No matter the reasons, the sober curious movement is gaining momentum and it's exciting. By being a sober, it makes you a punk, a rebel and part of the change. So on this cheeky episode of Sober Awkward find out why just talking about your sobriety can help other comrades join the fight against booze.ResourcesJOIN PATREON! and buy us a Cuppa so we can keep being awkward!https://www.patreon.com/user?u=81897291www.cuppa.community – The Free Social Network for the Sober and Sober Curious - Sober Events – Therapy – Sobriety Courses – Sober Groups, Tea and loads more.Buy Sober Tea! www.cuppashop.com@soberawkward @drunkmummysobermummy @cuppa.community @hamishadamscairns @patreon @AcastIf you are struggling with your relationship with alcohol please reach out to your local doctor, a therapist, AA Group or just chat to a close friend. Don't feel shame, just get the help you deserve.Contact us! If you have a topic you'd like us to cover then please email us -vicandhamish@soberawkward.comDon't forget to like, subscribe, and rate the podcast on iTunes https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/sober-awkward/id1565657975The more people we reach the more people we can help x#soberawkward #soberawkwardpodcast #drunkmummysobermummy #cuppa.community #sober #sobermom #sobermummy #sobriety #soberaf #sobermovement #sobercurious #alcoholfree #mummybloggers #writersofinsta #soberfamily #greyareadrinking #addiction #soberissexy #soberwomen #sobermomtribe #sobrietyrocks #soberlifestyle #alcoholfreelife #wedorecover #sobernation #mumblog #mentalhealth #motherhood #wineoclock #sobermums #selfcare #womeninrecovery #sobercommunity #soberdads Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Episode 90 - Julie Kandalec (known as Julie K) joins the podcast as our first manicurist guest on the show. Julie is a well-established artist who has worked on high fashion editorials, and advertisements, on numerous runway shows, and works with celebrities such as Jessica Chastain, Camilla Cabello, Viola Davis, and Emilia Clarke.Follow Julie:WebsiteInstagramSign Up for Nailpreneur hereJulie K Nail Academy InstagramNail Art Design Book and AccessoriesAgencyNail Atelier

Episode 89 - Julie Kandalec (known as Julie K) joins the podcast as our first manicurist guest on the show. Julie is a well-established artist who has worked on high fashion editorials, and advertisements, on numerous runway shows and works with celebrities such as Jessica Chastain, Camilla Cabello, Viola Davis, and Emilia Clarke.Follow Julie:WebsiteInstagramSign Up for Nailpreneur hereJulie K Nail Academy InstagramNail Art Design Book and AccessoriesAgencyNail AtelierEpisode Mentions:Ten Over TenEssieCNDThe Blondes